Dr Rilwanu Lukman sir, please say NO!

Why must Lukman be Petroleum Minister again? Are we that hard up for competent and contemporary Nigerians to run the affairs of this nation? This tendencies to rehash geriatric ghosts of our not-so-pleasant-nor-so-distant past creates the impression that only a special "few" can manage the Nigerian nation; the rest of us are mere plebians...irrelevant and incapable. But we all know that is not true.

How can a man who has been around as a career government jobber since I was just out of elementary school be the only one relevant enough to take over a ministry he last headed almost two decades ago?

Truth be told, it is either Dr. Lukman is the most astute and adept manipulator of the political machinery that has governance in a vise grip or he is probably the hottest brain Nigeria can muster at this critical hour. My logic then begs the question; if he is so hot, how come he did not fix these problems back then in the 80s when the complications weren't this severe; the Niger Delta brood were still passively docile and the "militants" hadn't tasted the forbidden fruit of ransom dollars and illegal bunkering zillions?

He had all the opportunities in this whole wide world to deregulate the petroleum sector as he is advocating now, to increase the number of refineries so we could be exporting products and not crude as he is reported to have noted at his Senate screening. Dr Lukman, had he been as visionary 20yrs ago as the position he is being considered for now desperately requires, should have for seen the current challenges, considering our population growth rate and our utter dependence on crude as a monolithic economy and set up structures to mitigate the attendant shortfalls. In simple English, if Dr Lukman was so hot back in 1985, we wouldn't be here in 2008.

Which is why his consistency in successive administrations baffle me. And his resurrection to the post of Minister for Petroleum is dumbfounding to say the least. When will the Nigerian political system start rewarding results and cease pandering to premodial instincts of ethnicity, religion and geographical advantages?

In a merit based society, it would be very hard to recycle our erstwhile Petroleum Minister back to the same position with the hard facts of the gross failure of the sector staring us all in the face. If there is a list of those who should be accountable for the current depravation in the sector, Dr Lukman should be in the top five section of that list, afterall, he has been around here for more than half the years the sector has existed in the Nigerian economy!

What new ideas will Dr Lukman bring to the table at this eleventh hour? What answers will he profer for the global downturn of our most valuable and solo income earner? Will his tool box that could not prevent the descent in this direction even when he was OPEC head huncho contain the hi-tech gadgets that the 21st century global financial market desperately needs to stem a seemingly inevitable crash?

While I respect the place of experience and do acknowledge Dr Lukman's service to our nation, the issues facing us now cannot allow us to wallow in cultural sentiments of eldership and statesmanship. We require the smartness and astuteness of a younger competent and dynamic mind to challenge the status quo. Dr. Lukman can never do this because he is the status quo!

President Yar'adua seems to favour regression than progression. The office of the President of any nation in this harrowing times require vision, focus, dedication, agility and dynamism; qualities we are yet to applaud in his administration almost two years into his tenure.

On the international scene, it is clear that almost all Dr Lukman's contemporaries have either retired into statesmanship in their countries or some are dead and gone (Bless their souls). The whole world is gravitating towards younger generational leadership...everyone it seems except Nigeria. How would Dr Lukman keep pace with the likes of Obama, Sarkozy or whoever his counterparts are in those nations? Does Nigeria want to be the spanner in the works of global recovery by slowing them down with our choice of Petroleum Minister? (as if we were that important abi? well it was just a thought...we can dream can't we)

On every logical grounds, including his age and health, I believe Dr Lukman should opt for a less vigorous role as adviser and statesman. Really, a great performer is that one who knows the best time to exit the stage. And really, he might be pushing the tab on outstaying his welcome in the fray of Nigerian governance. Dr Rilwanu Lukman sir, please say NO!

Knowing the nature of the Legislature, the 'screening' would just be a rubber stamp of the President's choices. Some of our honorable lawmakers are usually too star struck to be thorough sometimes. Who wouldn't be? Dr Lukman was the stuff we read about in Nigerian History growing up and to see him live? it's like being in the presence of royalty. We choose to be silent on the other possible incentives...

If the President and his staff bothered to take a poll on his choice for Petroleum Minister, the percentage of "nays" would stagger him. Most of us are embarrassed because it is an indictment on our generation. When will we be considered wise and capable enough to determine the affairs of our nation?

Like a friend summed it all up, Dr Rilwanu Lukman's grand and great grand children if he has any need him more crucially at this moment in time, than the Nigerian state. So Dr Lukman sir, please say No!

Why Obama may be the ideal U.S Foreign Policy Mascot

The primaries for Presidential nominations have become a tight, intriguing and interesting saga especially in the Democratic camp. I have watched with great interest the dramatic turns in the campaign tone, tide and talk with the media in the umpire booth.

It is interesting to me as a visitor to the US at this crucial time, coming from a recent tour as Campaign Manager for Reverend Chris Okotie’s Presidential Campaign in Nigeria where my candidate was almost an Obama look alike touting “Hope, Change, Inspiration and Can Do” attitude.

While I would not rate our success with the almost cultic movement Obamamania has become, especially among young idealistic voters between 18-24 , the issues are basically the same and the arguments against us very similar; starting with “too young” to “no government experience”. We lost, but it piqued my interest in the contest playing out on the US political scene in the Democratic Party.

Evaluating the issues in this contest, it became clear that Senator Obama had blazed through more than half of the primaries on the comet of charisma, inspiration, vibrancy, motivation and integrity. While these may seem ‘vague and rhetoric’ to older Americans and Clinton’s camp, it has resonated with the younger generation whom I refer to as Future America who have become disillusioned with the double speak of the Establishment from parents to teachers and now politicians. This is a generation desperately in search of a role model and troop rallying General who seems close to them enough to understand their challenges.

On the other hand, the older folk, who I would call Experienced America, have been there, done that and have a reality check t-shirt to prove it! So they are obviously not impressed with the change momentum. The ‘real’ issues of safe & working America are more important to them with the imminent threat of home foreclosures, unemployment (63,000 job cuts in February alone), and an economy in possible recession, with loved ones in constant danger to terrorists overseas and on US soil.

To these weather beaten group, the Clinton message of ‘a lifetime of experience’ is safe and comforting; and these divergent views show up in waves, forcing one of the most tumultuous and closely contested primaries in decades, kept ever alive and clashing by good old American News Networks and the International Media.

One of the most controversial points in the campaign has been foreign policy and the best candidate to lead America in a post Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts and imminent terrorism threat. Senator Obama seem to be losing that battle, what with Senator Clinton’s ‘lifetime of experience’ being aggressively pushed as her qualification for the post of US No 1 citizen. The Obama campaign have been unable to provide convincing arguments to turn the tide which was probably accountable for the massive loss his campaign suffered in Texas and Ohio on Tuesday March 5 primaries.

The American electorate, palpably concerned for the safety of their nation and in the wake of foreign policy blunders of the outgoing Bush administration, seem to be reluctantly stepping off the ‘Obama Hope Express’ with its euphoria of change and hope and grudgingly climbing the ‘Clinton Experience Wagon’ with its reality show of fear and longevity. However, it is interesting that no one, not even the media have bothered to ask what kind of foreign policy the US needs in the next 8 years and which of the two warring candidates is better placed to deliver to keep America safe and working.

As a foreigner observer looking in, it appears that the Americans either have their facts distorted or maybe they only see the situation from the American perspective; one that has ill served the world’s leading democracy in the 'Bushy' years. Contrary to what most Americans believe, the world would rather be friends than foes…even the much dreaded Islamic militants in the Middle East.

The frustration of the world with the United States is a perception of high handedness and superiority which is never appreciated by other sovereign nations, as seen in the on going conflicts on various continents with the US involved directly or indirectly. The ideal US President who will succeed in the turnaround of such negative global perception has to be one with a disarming demeanor who appears less threatening and more approachable.

President Bill Clinton was successful in foreign policy (though he was even less experienced than Senator Obama is when he, Clinton became President) because he was approachable, appeared to listen and didn’t seem to push the sometimes sooo irritating “American Agenda” too doggedly like Bush has done in the last 8 years. Sadly, his wife, Hilary somehow doesn’t give that same impression.

Her rival however seem to have all the odds stacked against him…from the American perspective, that is. He is young, black, lacks experience, and even has his faith questioned with a Muslim middle name and a last name sounding like America’s most wanted enemy! Obama sure beats every stereotype of an American President.

Strange as this may seem, his unpalatable credentials might be the magic portion to change US foreign image. Take the fact that he is of mixed race, born of a Kenyan father and a white American mother from Kansas.

While loads of blue collar America find this rather unpalatable, it may appeal to the despots and rebels on the African continent who might finally feel a sense of belonging with 'intruding big brother America', after all, its No 1 Citizen is one of them...albeit technically (DNA only!) I mean, imagine that the American President has a grandmother in the shanties of Kenya. Wow! his blood grandma! 'good...that makes America feel like a real blood brother and in Africa, you don't fight your brother...see? instant tension dissipater.

Then again, his middle name is Hussein...100% Muslim...by name only though. Finally, the camp of Osama's kinsmen finally achieve a victory even they could never have dreamt of...an American President with a Muslim middle name.. and not a political gimmick! That's ten for the price of one!

However,this fact might be the magic portion potent enough to change US fortunes in the Middle east. For the first time, Palestinians may finally feel a sense of being part of America...which may soften the animosity against everything American and neutralize the alienation. then and only then can the US make real progress with the peace process thus eliminating the potential for . Why fight when one of your own is in charge? Wham! Obama becomes the singular most potent insurance policy for every American and his interests abroad...all for Obama's sake.

Then lets talk inexperience. While this look like a negative, it actually does have a positive slant to it. It takes experience to step on toes, offend sensibilities...and bruise egos. The longer you have been around, the more your brownie points. You will agree, 'senior' Hillary does outwit 'junior Obama' in this category: which may work in US favor. He is a clean slate and dealing with him might provide egotistic leaders like the short man with a long name of Iran, a face saving trap door to backtrack on his nuclear madness.US may be able to to rewind and start again...and veryone is happy.

It gets even better;Obama is too young...yes...and so is many world leaders these days...look at the new 'darushka' in Russia now..he is only 42! with Senator Clinton's "I am older and more experienced than you" campaign platform, she might not connect with Valvedev (she couldn't even pronounce his name...and neither can I!)and he might make it more difficult for the US to stay on top of the impending Russian/American face off.An Obama will be a better choice ..they are contemporaries same generation...equals better understanding. Who wants to sit at a negotiating table with someone who reminds you of your mother?