Politics in Northern Nigeria is undergoing significant changes as political alliances, defections, negotiations and calculations ahead of future elections continue to reshape relationships among influential leaders and their supporters.
Yet beneath these developments lies a fundamental question: Can political power be sustained through agreements among political elites, or does lasting success depend on the confidence of ordinary citizens?
The debate surrounding the possible adoption of Operation Rainbow in Katsina State provides an opportunity to examine the changing character of Northern politics. Although political strategies may differ, the assumption that a formula associated with one state can automatically succeed in another risks overlooking the social, political and historical realities that shape electoral behaviour.
For the All Progressives Congress (APC), the challenge is not simply to retain political control but to preserve the relationships and grassroots structures that sustain its electoral strength. In Katsina, where Governor Dikko Umaru Radda leads the APC administration, any political arrangement capable of altering the party’s internal balance requires careful consideration.
Northern politics has traditionally been influenced by community relationships, party structures, traditional institutions, religious leaders and grassroots mobilisation. The importance of these factors varies across states and communities, but their influence cannot be dismissed. Political decisions made by powerful individuals must eventually contend with the expectations of voters whose support determines electoral outcomes.
This is where strategies built primarily around elite negotiations may encounter difficulties. Political leaders can reach agreements, negotiate alliances and encourage defections, but these arrangements do not automatically translate into popular acceptance. The electorate has its own expectations, interests and understanding of political fairness.
The proposition associated with Operation Rainbow, involving support for a candidate linked to the Nyesom Wike faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against an incumbent APC governor, with the expectation of a subsequent defection to the APC, illustrates this dilemma. While such an arrangement might appear politically attractive, its long-term consequences would depend on the candidate’s credibility, public acceptance and the reaction of existing party stakeholders.
Katsina is not Rivers State. The political dynamics that shape one state cannot be assumed to produce identical results in another. Any strategy that fails to account for these differences could create problems beyond those anticipated by its architects.
One recurring weakness in Nigerian politics is the belief that political structures can be rearranged from the top and that grassroots supporters will automatically follow. This assumption underestimates the commitment of party members who have spent years campaigning, mobilising voters and defending their political organisations.
When such individuals believe their contributions have been disregarded, dissatisfaction can develop within the party. Grassroots mobilisation may weaken, internal disagreements may deepen and opposition groups may find opportunities to attract disillusioned supporters.
This does not mean that an incumbent should be exempt from criticism or that political parties must preserve existing arrangements indefinitely. Democratic competition requires accountability and credible opportunities for alternative candidates to emerge. However, there is a difference between an open political contest and an arrangement perceived as designed to impose a predetermined outcome.
For Governor Radda, the potential consequences of such a controversy could be significant. An attempt perceived by his supporters as an unfair effort to undermine his political standing might generate sympathy and strengthen their determination to defend him. A dispute over political succession could consequently become a wider debate about grassroots representation, fairness and the influence of powerful interests.
Under such circumstances, Governor Radda could gain an opportunity to reinforce his political identity beyond his record in office. However, whether this translates into increased popularity would depend on public sentiment, his administration’s performance, the credibility of competing candidates and his ability to maintain relationships with political stakeholders. It would therefore be premature to conclude that any political operation would automatically transform him into the most popular governor in Katsina’s history.
Nevertheless, political strategists must recognise that an initiative designed to weaken an incumbent can sometimes strengthen the very individual it seeks to undermine.
Beyond Katsina, the evolving nature of Northern politics raises important questions about political maturity and democratic responsibility. Defections and alliances are legitimate features of multiparty democracy, but their value should not be measured solely by the number of governors or prominent politicians a party attracts.
Citizens are increasingly concerned about insecurity, education, healthcare, unemployment, agricultural development and the rising cost of living. These issues deserve greater attention than prolonged political struggles centred exclusively on personalities and control of government.
Political parties that prioritise electoral calculations without adequately addressing public concerns risk widening the distance between political leadership and the electorate. Winning elections remains important, but the ability to translate political authority into meaningful improvements in people’s lives is equally essential.
For the APC leadership, any proposed realignment in Katsina should therefore be assessed against its potential impact on party unity, grassroots confidence and future electoral prospects. Consultations across the state’s three senatorial districts, credible public opinion assessments and an honest evaluation of competing candidates would provide a stronger basis for decision-making than assumptions borrowed from another political environment.
Political analyst Lawal Mamman Dawai argues that the changing political landscape in Northern Nigeria requires party leaders to pay closer attention to grassroots loyalty, internal democracy and the consequences of elite driven political arrangements. He maintains that while alliances and negotiations may offer short term political advantages, their sustainability depends on whether party members and ordinary voters consider them fair and beneficial.
Community stakeholder Rabi’u Ibrahim on his part, maintains that ordinary citizens should remain central to political decision making because they bear the consequences of political choices and determine electoral outcomes through their votes. He notes that grassroots supporters invest considerable time and effort in mobilising voters and sustaining political parties, making it important for party leaders to recognise their contributions when considering political alliances and leadership changes.
Ultimately, the strength of a political party is measured not merely by the offices it controls but also by the confidence it commands among citizens. Alliances may open the door to power, but trust, performance and responsible leadership determine whether that power can be sustained.
If Operation Rainbow or a similar strategy is considered in Katsina, its success should not be judged simply by whether it produces a governor under the APC banner. The more important question is whether the process strengthens the party, preserves democratic participation and advances the interests of the electorate.
Northern Nigeria needs political leadership that understands the difference between winning a political contest and earning public confidence. No strategy, however sophisticated, can permanently substitute for that responsibility.
In the final analysis, the most enduring political victories will belong to those who recognise that the people are not merely instruments of electoral success but the ultimate foundation of democratic power.
