Months after the February 25 presidential election was won and lost, analysts are still sharply divided on how and why Wole Soyinka was sucked into the grand conspiracy that produced Bola Tinubu as the President of Nigeria. Was he driven by ethnicity or was he rendered impotent by age? Did material inducement play any role in the capture of the Nobel laureate? Some have said that none fits into the Soyinka mould. They argue, and fiercely too, that Soyinka is made of a nobler stuff. They refuse to have him debased, just like that.
So, what went wrong? How did Soyinka, a strong voice that has torn through the thickets of Nigeria’s moral wilderness for decades, dissolve into ignoble acquiescence? How did he lose his fangs at a time when he ought to bare it fiercely in the effort to rescue the fatherland? Who stole the soul of the acerbic, unstoppable moral avatar? These questions have become somewhat protuberant, somewhat compelling. They commend themselves for consideration in our present circumstances in Nigeria.
It will be trite to remind anyone here that Soyinka has fought our wars. He may not have been to the battle field, yet he is a field marshal of sorts. Bad governance and all the decrepitude associated with it never escaped his vitriol. He disapproved of them without let or hinderance. In fact, nation-wreckers and moral lepers have always had Soyinka to contend with. But 2023 changed all that. It was the year that rescue beckoned on Nigeria and its peoples. It was the year well-meaning Nigerians filed out to be counted. But Soyinka, once the moral compass of the Nigerian social and political canvas, was missing in action. Instead, he was seen groveling before those Fela called “opposite people.” Who conjured Soyinka to the side of deviates of Nigeria? Is he also a victim of the gyre that swept through the country and left in its wake a vortex of cyclical disruptions?
There was reason to worry about the strange mutation of Soyinka while the disputations over the February 25 presidential election lasted. Whereas observers, both local and international, were unmistakable in their denunciation of the charade called the 2023 presidential election, Soyinka, strangely and sadly, looked the other way. His disposition reminded us of the dictum which teaches that what is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do or say nothing. No doubt, Soyinka said something about the outcome of the February 25 presidential election. But to what end? Who did he appeal to? He appealed to mediocrity. He appealed to the subversion of the people’s will. He accepted and lionized crookedness of the worst order.
Let us recall that a major issue that overshadowed almost everything else in the 2023 presidential race bordered on Tinubu’s integrity. There were, and still are, huge question marks about his background. The schools he attended and the certificates he obtained have been matters of controversy. His claims, including Chicago papers, remain largely opaque. Nigerians are thoroughly confused over tales and claims that cannot stand logical scrutiny.
While the campaigns were going on, Tinubu shielded himself from scrutiny. He never participated in town halls or any debate session with his fellow contestants. Even when Chatham House played host to him, he dodged questions directed at him. Instead, he invited surrogates to speak for him. In all of this, it was obvious to everyone that Tinubu had something to hide.
All of this posed a lot of integrity questions for Tinubu. Not surprisingly, these issues sparked off an excitable debate. Why was Candidate Tinubu playing hide and seek? Nigeria was not alone in this drama of opaqueness. Even the international community reaped its fair share of confusion. International media organizations could not situate him properly. The popular question then was: who is this man that wants to take over the reins of governance in Nigeria? This question remains largely unanswered even as Tinubu has become President.
While this entire drama was going on, concerned Nigerians took interest in the matter. They weighed in on the debate. They assumed one position or the other. As someone who never missed out on any national issue, especially those that raise integrity questions, it was expected that Soyinka would take a position on this vexed issue. As someone who is given to igniting debates even when there is no good reason to do so, the expectation was that Soyinka would be at the forefront in the effort to situate the man, Tinubu. But that never happened. He maintained an astonishing silence. Many were, therefore, wont to wonder: when did Soyinka become detached from or even disinterested in hotly contested national issues? When did the firebrand become an impotent onlooker? Regardless of all this, Nigerians left Soyinka to wallow in his studied silence. But what got tongues wagging was when the same Soyinka who had all along buried his head in the sand suddenly shook off his inertia and rose stridently in defence of Tinubu. The new Soyinka was intolerant of anything that suggested that Tinubu did not win the election. He took on the Obidients and packaged them in hostile terms. At some point, Soyinka had to travel to South Africa to defend Tinubu’s mandate.
Simply put, Soyinka ignored all the cobwebs around Tinubu. The integrity deficit he suffers did not matter. It did not matter whether Tinubu lied on oath or not. Soyinka conveniently overlooked the controversies and contradictions around Tinubu’s Chicago papers. At the end of the day, it was difficult to reconcile the new Soyinka with what he used to be. The real, original Soyinka would have blurted out over the allegations of forgery and perjury against Tinubu. Concerned Nigerians are still asking: what befell Soyinka?
Those who really appreciate the fact that Nigeria is on a free fall are worried about the current disposition of the likes of Soyinka to compelling national issues. When voices of reason slip into a comatose state, there is reason to worry. What could this affliction be? What does it portend for Nigeria? These are disturbing scenarios. It is a serious national calamity that signposts the imminence of collapse.
When nations want to kiss the disastrous dust, those who know suffer a certain moroseness. They lose their bite. They begin to manifest symptoms that look more or less like the Soyinka affliction. National interest will no longer matter. Integrity will be flushed down the drain. It is situations like this that lend credence to the truism that the reign of evil terminates in universal darkness.