Inadvisability Of Allowing Wike’s Ambition To Destabilise Governance In Rivers

BY ISAAC ASABOR*
In the intricate tapestry of Nigerian politics, few figures have sparked as much debate as Nyesom Wike, the former Governor of Rivers State and current Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Wike’s political journey has been marked by a series of strategic manoeuvres that have left many questioning his allegiance. Is he a political chameleon, seamlessly blending into the colours of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), or is he a shrewd strategist, adept at navigating the treacherous waters of Nigerian governance?
Wike’s political narrative took a dramatic turn when a video surfaced, showing him joining the APC after previously swearing allegiance to the PDP. This move came amidst speculations that the PDP might not offer him the Vice President’s slot, revealing the high stakes and personal ambitions that often drive political affiliations. The plot thickened when 27 Rivers State lawmakers, allegedly loyal to Wike, defected from the PDP to the APC. This mass defection underscored the internal divisions within the PDP and hinted at Wike’s significant influence over the state’s political dynamics.
Despite these developments, Wike has publicly maintained his identity as a PDP member, stating that his absence from PDP events and campaigns does not negate his membership in the party. This declaration has only added to the ambiguity surrounding his political stance. Elder statesman and PDP chieftain Bode George has defended Wike’s appointment as Minister in the APC-led government, suggests that Wike’s actions are more aligned with pragmatic governance than party loyalty.
The question remains: Can Wike be accused of ‘eating with both hands’? The evidence suggests a complex interplay of loyalty, ambition, and pragmatism. Wike’s political dance raises important questions about the nature of party allegiance in Nigeria. Is it a binding contract or a flexible arrangement subject to the whims of political expediency?
As Nigerians grapple with unfulfilled promises, corruption, and infrastructural challenges, the actions of politicians like Wike become a focal point for public scrutiny.
Whether Wike is seen as a political opportunist or a shrewd strategist, his story is a reflection of the broader political landscape, where allegiance is often a matter of
convenience rather than conviction.
Nyesom Wike’s political manoeuvres invite us to interrogate the very foundations of party allegiance in Nigerian politics. As the nation moves forward, it will be essential
to examine the motivations behind such actions and their implications for governance and social trust. Wike’s case may well be a microcosm of the larger political dynamics at play in Nigeria, where the line between party loyalty and personal ambition is increasingly blurred.
Given the obscurity and ambiguity that characterizes Wike’s party membership status and loyalty, it is expedient for Nigerians to speak out as it would not be good for Rivers
State to literarily be burnt on the altar of Wike’s desire and at
the perils of his ambition. To aptly put it, there should be a call for
accountability in Rivers State.
It is expedient to confess at this juncture that the recent events have cast a shadow over the state’s political landscape, raising concerns about the potential consequences of unchecked personal ambition.
The political turmoil in Rivers State has reached a critical juncture, with a High Court recently ordering a group of lawmakers, allegedly loyal to former Governor Nyesom Wike, to cease parading themselves as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. This legal intervention follows a year-long political crisis that has seen the emergence of multiple speakers within the state’s legislature, reflecting a deep-seated
struggle for power and influence.
At the heart of this discord is the alleged rift between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike. Accusations fly from both camps, with former Attorney General Prof Zacchaeus Adangor claimed that Governor Fubara is not committed to reconciliation efforts. The political divide has led to a factionalization within the state’s
governance structures, with the defection of several lawmakers from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) further complicating matters.
The situation in Rivers State is emblematic of a larger issue that plagues many democratic institutions: the danger of allowing personal ambitions to override the
collective good. When individual goals supersede the interests of the electorate, governance suffers, and the people’s trust in their leaders erodes.
It is imperative that political figures in Rivers State, and indeed across Nigeria, are called to order. The pursuit of personal ambition must never come at the cost of destabilising the state’s governance or compromising the welfare of its citizens. Leaders must be held accountable for their actions and reminded that their primary duty is to sustain good governance.

As Rivers State navigates these turbulent political waters, all stakeholders must engage in dialogue and seek a resolution that upholds the principles of democracy and good governance. Only through collective effort and a commitment to the common good can the state overcome the perils of personal ambition and chart a course towards a more stable and prosperous future.
The unfolding political drama in Rivers State serves as a cautionary tale for all political actors. It underscores the need for vigilance, accountability, and a steadfast commitment to the values that underpin our democracy. For the sake of Rivers State and its people, it is time to put aside personal ambitions and work together for the greater good.
Without a doubt, the ongoing political tussle between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and Nyesom Wike has raised significant concerns about the potential impact on the citizens of the state. The conflict, which has seen a series of legal and political manoeuvres, poses a risk to the stability and governance of the region.
Both political personalities in the state have been embroiled in a dispute that has affected the legislature and raised questions about the governor’s legitimacy and the integrity of democracy in the state. The crisis, rooted in Wike’s ambition to maintain influence over the state’s politics after his tenure, has led to a factionalization within the
government and the defection of several lawmakers.
The peace deal brokered by President Bola Tinubu, which includes the reappointment
of commissioners loyal to Wike and the restoration of lawmakers who defected from the PDP to the APC has been met with public outrage. The terms of the agreement have been criticized for prioritizing political games over the welfare of Rivers residents.
The relocation of the House of Assembly sessions to the Government House in Port
Harcourt, following the arson of the original assembly chamber, further complicates the situation. This move, while argued to be for safety reasons, has been perceived as a strategic play by Governor Fubara to maintain control amid threats of impeachment.
The citizens of Rivers State are caught in the crossfire of this political struggle, with the
potential for the conflict to disrupt their daily lives and the state’s development. It is crucial for the leaders involved to prioritize the needs of the people and work towards a resolution that ensures the continuity of effective governance and the upholding of democratic values.
The fight between Wike and Fubara not only jeopardizes the political stability of Rivers State but also threatens the well-being of its inhabitants. It is a stark reminder of the importance of responsible leadership and the need for political actors to act in the best interest of those they serve.