Abdulsalami Says Nigeria Could Have Been Better Off If Buhari and Idiagbon Stayed Longer

(Muhammadu Buhari. Photo Credit: Nation News)

Former Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar (retd.), has expressed the belief that Nigeria might have achieved stronger economic growth, development, and social order had the military government of Major-General Muhammadu Buhari and Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon remained in power beyond its 20-month tenure.

Abdulsalami made this disclosure in his autobiography, in a chapter reflecting on the series of military interventions that shaped Nigeria's political history and the growing politicisation of the armed forces during that period.

According to him, despite the excesses associated with the Buhari administration, the regime succeeded in restoring discipline, patriotism, and public order at a time when many Nigerians had grown disillusioned with the civilian government it had overthrown.

He maintained that, in his view, the Buhari/Idiagbon government brought considerable sanity to the country, describing both men as disciplined individuals who sought to promote law, order, and patriotism among Nigerians during their time in office.

He explained that the regime introduced measures aimed at instilling order, including environmental sanitation exercises, enforced public queuing, and stricter regulation of public conduct.

While acknowledging that the administration faced widespread criticism over detentions without trial, media censorship, and harsh prison sentences handed to politicians, Abdulsalami argued that the government had been attempting to address deep-rooted national decay.

He admitted that the regime had its excesses, noting that Nigerians grew impatient with what they considered overly harsh governance, particularly the jailing of politicians, some for as long as 500 years, alongside the detention of human rights activists without trial and censorship of the press.

Despite these shortcomings, the former Head of State maintained that the administration had been on the right path before it was eventually overthrown on August 27, 1985, expressing the belief that had the Buhari regime stayed in power longer, Nigeria might not be facing its current challenges, and some measure of law and order might have taken firmer root.

The retired general also disclosed that, contrary to widespread assumptions, he had absolutely no knowledge of the August 1985 coup that removed Buhari from office and brought his longtime friend and military colleague, General Ibrahim Babangida, to power.

He explained that many had expected him to be among the plotters owing to his close relationship with Babangida, with whom he attended the same primary and secondary schools and later served in the military, but he insisted that he had no involvement in or prior knowledge of the coup.

He added that he never confronted Babangida about being excluded from the planning, but believed the omission may have been intentional, possibly to keep him outside the conspiracy so he could serve as a safeguard should events go wrong, noting that military training emphasises always maintaining a backup position.

Abdulsalami described the 1985 takeover as essentially a palace coup that targeted only Buhari and Idiagbon, noting that it was bloodless, unlike several earlier military interventions in the country's history.

Reflecting on the December 31, 1983 coup that brought Buhari to power, he recalled being on his way to Kaduna Airport to fly his ailing mother abroad for treatment when Brigadier Sani Abacha announced the overthrow of President Shehu Shagari's administration.

He noted that Abacha's broadcast cited corruption, economic mismanagement, unemployment, food shortages, decaying infrastructure, and unpaid salaries as justification for the intervention.

Although he maintained that he had never personally supported coups, Abdulsalami acknowledged that many Nigerians welcomed the change at the time, believing the civilian government had lost touch with the people's welfare.

He noted that the repeated military interventions gradually drew the armed forces deeper into political affairs, exposing officers to significant personal and professional risk.

The former Head of State also revealed that he was once interrogated during investigations into the alleged 1986 coup plot involving Major-General Mamman Vatsa, simply because he had attended a social gathering in Port Harcourt where some of the alleged conspirators were also present.

He explained that he appeared before a Special Investigation Panel chaired by Brigadier Sani Sami, which also included then Inspector-General of Police, Gambo Jimeta, and was eventually cleared after providing satisfactory explanations.

He further recounted narrowly avoiding involvement in Major Gideon Orkar's failed coup attempt in April 1990, as he happened to be in Saudi Arabia performing the lesser hajj at the time of the mutiny.

He disclosed that one of the plotters, Captain Steve Ihile, whom he knew personally, had encouraged him to pray for Nigeria during the pilgrimage, only for him to later learn that Ihile had been among those k!lled following the coup's failure.

He said the experience reinforced his belief that coup plots were inherently dangerous undertakings that often left officers trapped regardless of the choices they made, noting that those who declined to join a coup risked becoming targets if it succeeded, while those who failed to report a conspiracy could equally face punishment should it fail.

Abdulsalami also reflected on his role in the military tribunal that tried suspects connected to the Orkar coup, revealing that more than 800 military and civilian suspects appeared before the panel.

He noted that many of those brought before the tribunal appeared to be victims of circumstance, including soldiers and drivers who had simply followed orders without any knowledge that a coup was underway.

The former military ruler further noted that some of the grievances raised by the plotters included allegations of marginalisation, a lack of justice and equity, and perceptions that certain regions of the country held disproportionate political and economic dominance over others.