Presidential Broadcast: The Deliberate Deliverable Dovetails to Dialogue

By Bala Ibrahim

Yesterday, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu addressed the nation, pursuant to the request of many Nigerians, that he should respond to the anger of the protesting youth, on the issue of hunger, which they are blaming on bad governance. Consequently, the President was on air in the early hours of the day, to talk to the people, his people, Nigerians. The President spoke for less than 30 minutes, wherein he did an overview on the major problems of the nation, with simple synopsis of possible panacea.

Yes, possible panacea, and not absolute solutions. But a lot of people, including the entire members of the opposition, gave an overwhelming vote of no confidence to the President’s speech. Because of the involvement of the opposition, the verdict didn’t come to me as a surprise. The opposition is always on the opposite position. And that’s the beauty of democracy.

Also, because of the hunger in the land, which has brought a genuine anger, it would be illogical, to expect a hungry man to reason with reason. Indeed a hungry man is an angry man, whose judgement may be manifestly an unjust verdict, that need not be true to the evidence adduced. This may be the reason why many people refused to see, or hear the acknowledgement of the President, to the fact that he is disturbed by the protest. Some are saying he didn’t say anything. He didn’t, nor even admit, or acknowledge, the seriousness of the protest, they say. That is the effect of hunger, on a man in anger. And it’s a genuine and legitimate reaction.

Had the sense of reasoning of those making such condemnation, who may be genuinely hungry, not been beclouded by a misdirected anger, they probably would have paid attention to the opening remarks of the President, where he started thus:

“My fellow Nigerians, I speak to you today with a HEAVY HEART and a sense of responsibility, aware of the turmoil and violent protests unleashed in some of our states. Notably among the protesters were young Nigerians who desired a better and more progressive country where their dreams, hopes, and personal aspirations would be fulfilled”.

I personally put the emphasis on heavy heart on purpose, to make the hungry and genuinely angry, understand that indeed the President understands their plight, and he did acknowledged it in his broadcast. As such, that condemnation is uncalled for.

Not withstanding where the President said, “I commiserate with the families and relations of those who have died in the protests. We must stop further bloodshed, violence and destruction”, in what is appearing like a grandstanding, some people are accusing him of insensitivity, by refusing to show concern to those that lost their lives to the brutal bullets of the law enforcement agents. Well, if a man is hungry, it would be illogical to expect him to reason with reason. He is genuinely angry. And Mr. President has himself admitted to the hunger and anger.

The argument of some, on what they called the emptiness of the broadcast is that, the President refused to announce the return of the fuel subsidy, which they say he removed on his first day in office with a reckless fiat. Perhaps because of the genuine anger of hunger, those accusing the President of making an empty broadcast, by refusing to address the subsidy issue were unconscious when he said,

“For decades, our economy has remained anaemic and taken a dip because of many misalignments that have stunted our growth. Just over a year ago, our dear country, Nigeria, reached a point where we couldn’t afford to continue THE USE OF TEMPORARY SOLUTIONS TO SOLVE LONG-TERM PROBLEMS FOR THE SAKE OF NOW AND OUR UNBORN GENERATIONS. I therefore took the painful, yet necessary decision to remove fuel subsidies and abolish multiple foreign exchange systems which had constituted a noose around the economic jugular of our Nation and impeded our economic development and progress”.

Again, I put the phrase, the use of temporary solutions to solve long-term problems for the sake of now and our unborn generations in capital letters on purpose, in order to press home the seriousness of the situation, and the archaic and artificial approach of our previous leaders to the plight of Nigerians and their future. President Tinubu was bold enough to confront the problem head on, knowing fully that his action would come with the consequence of a misdirected anger.

On the issue of hunger, occasioned by the high cost of foodstuff, the federal government had since announced the suspension of import duty on certain categories of food items, and the aim is simple: to curb food inflation.

The catch word, which the hungry and genuinely angry refused to hear in the President’s broadcast is the olive branch of dialogue, which the President said thus:

“Under the circumstances, I hereby enjoin protesters and the organisers to suspend any further protest and create room for dialogue, which I have always acceded to at the slightest opportunity.”

Methinks, it is in the course of that dialogue, that the protesters would engage the President on all the burning issues of the nation, including the thorny issue of fuel subsidy. After all, he said, and I quote. “My dear Nigerians, especially our youth, I have heard you loud and clear. I understand the pain and frustration that drive these protests, and I want to assure you that our government is committed to listening and addressing the concerns of our citizens”.

I think, it now behoves on the protesters to form a strategic team, that would harmonize their positions, and engage the President with pragmatism. They should dialogue with him in the spirit of concrete communication. Engage him with the spirit of strategic thinking that should follow the template of communication, which runs in circles. Through dialogue, you can get the President to do the unthinkable. After all, the dictionary says, dialogue is nothing but a conversation or discussion to resolve a problem.

Except we simply want to give the dog a bad name in order to hang it, I think the protesters or those accusing the President of giving an empty broadcast, should go back and listen to the broadcast again. And I mean listen with an open and objective mind. We should stop dodging the issue of dialogue, please.

With a population exceeding 200 million people, and more than double that number of problems, except by way of a miracle, no one can make a 20 minutes broadcast, wherein he would, therein, address to the satisfaction of everyone, all the problems of the country. It is impossible, and President Tinubu can not be the first to do that. His broadcast had a deliberate deliverable, that dovetails to the invitation for dialogue, I think.