The persistent criticism of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar by former President Olusegun Obasanjo has become one of the most enduring features of Nigeria’s political landscape.
Whether during election campaigns or in periods of relative political calm, Obasanjo almost always finds reason to direct public criticism at his former deputy.
To many Nigerians, this pattern appears to transcend ordinary political disagreement. It has created the impression of what may be described as “Atikuphobia” – a figurative political obsession that repeatedly resurfaces whenever Atiku Abubakar’s political future becomes the subject of national conversation.
Political disagreements between leaders are a normal feature of every democracy. However, when criticism is sustained over decades and consistently directed at one individual, it inevitably raises questions about its true motivation.
Many Nigerians believe that the differences between Obasanjo and Atiku have long ceased to be ideological or policy based. Rather, they now appear to reflect a deeply rooted personal grievance that continues to shape the former President’s interventions in public affairs.
History records that Atiku Abubakar served as Vice President under Chief Obasanjo for eight years and was widely acknowledged as a key member of the administration that introduced significant economic reforms and privatisation policies. Their relationship later deteriorated over constitutional and political issues, especially during the controversial debate over the ill -fated third term agenda.
Since then, both men have continued to offer conflicting accounts of the events that divided them, leaving Nigerians to draw their own conclusions.
What is particularly striking is that no matter how many political platforms Atiku has contested under or how many years have passed since they left office, Obasanjo’s criticism appears unrelenting. Successive administrations have come and gone, yet his public attention repeatedly returns to his former deputy. Such consistency has reinforced the belief among many observers that the former President has found it difficult to separate political judgment from personal disappointment.
Ironically, the sustained attacks have done little to diminish Atiku Abubakar’s political relevance. If anything, they have strengthened the perception that he remains one of Nigeria’s most influential opposition figures. Despite repeated criticism from one of the country’s most prominent elder statesmen, Atiku has continued to command nationwide support, build political coalitions, and remain a formidable participant in Nigeria’s democratic process.
One lesson from history is that no individual possesses the exclusive authority to determine who is qualified to lead a nation. In every democracy, that responsibility belongs solely to the electorate. Political endorsements may carry influence, but they cannot replace the sovereign will of the people expressed through the ballot box. Ultimately, Nigerians, not former leaders, will decide who earns their confidence.
Statesmen occupy a unique place in society. Their words carry enormous weight and often shape public opinion. For that reason, Nigerians expect elder statesmen to rise above personal grievances and devote their influence to strengthening democratic institutions, promoting national unity, and mentoring the next generation of leaders. Constructive criticism remains essential to democracy, but it is most valuable when it is balanced, objective, and issue driven, rather than appearing personal.
As the nation prepares for another electoral cycle, Nigerians are more concerned about inflation, insecurity, unemployment, declining purchasing power, education, healthcare, and economic recovery than lingering personal rivalries among political leaders. The country’s democratic progress will be better served when national conversations focus on practical solutions to these pressing challenges instead of revisiting political disputes that have persisted for over two decades.
It is also worth recalling that political history is often kinder to those who demonstrate resilience in the face of adversity. Atiku Abubakar has remained consistent in his pursuit of the presidency through constitutional and democratic means. Whether one agrees with his political ambitions or not, his persistence reflects an enduring faith in the democratic process rather than in extra constitutional alternatives.
Perhaps the greatest challenge for Chief Olusegun Obasanjo is not Atiku Abubakar himself, but the inability to completely move beyond the political disagreements that ended their partnership many years ago. So long as every major political milestone involving Atiku Abubakar continues to attract a response from the former President, the perception of “Atikuphobia” is likely to persist in the minds of many Nigerians.
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo would do well to rescind his relentless attacks on his former Vice President. As an elder statesman and former Head of State, his legacy should be defined by wisdom, reconciliation, and nation building rather than by recurring personal criticisms of a man with whom he served for eight years. There comes a time in the life of every statesman when history expects him to rise above old political battles and embrace the role of a national father figure. If Obasanjo couldn’t find reason(s) to indict Atiku Abubakar when he thoroughly investigated him, one wonders what makes him think many Nigerians will take his continuous attacks on Atiku Abubakar serious. Many view his attacks as nothing but attacking the man who stopped him from life presidency because Obasanjo would have gone beyond a 3rd term in office had he succeeded in buying a 3rd term.
The political landscape has changed considerably since the end of the Obasanjo administration. A new generation of Nigerians is more interested in solutions to the country’s pressing challenges than in the lingering disagreements between former political allies. Continuing to revisit the past risks diminishing the stature of a leader whose contributions to Nigeria’s democratic development are already firmly established. Persistent attacks on a former deputy, irrespective of political differences, risk turning a respected elder statesman into a subject of unnecessary public debate and ridicule.
Chief Obasanjo should recognise that the train has long since left the station in Abeokuta. Nigeria has moved beyond the politics of yesterday, and the future will ultimately be determined by the sovereign will of the people, not by the preferences or disapproval of any former leader. It is time to let go of old animosities, allow history to take its course, and permit Nigerians to make their own judgment about those who seek to lead them. In the end, history will judge both Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and Atiku Abubakar not by the bitterness of their disagreements, but by the quality of their service, their commitment to democratic values, and the enduring legacies they leave behind.
Senator Ehigie Uzamere
