Opinion

Hakeem Baba-Ahmed: Outsider in the System

By Abdulrauf Aliyu 

The interview Hakeem Baba-Ahmed granted Arise TV yesterday evening has sent (and still sending) shockwaves through Nigeria's political landscape, raising deep questions about the internal dynamics of President Bola Tinubu’s administration. Baba-Ahmed, a seasoned public servant, former academic, and former presidential aspirant, resigned as the Special Adviser on Political Matters to the President just weeks ago. His analysis of the Tinubu administration, coupled with his bold statement about the president’s alleged isolation from key political actors, reveals more than just a critique of Tinubu’s leadership style. It exposes a deeper truth about how Nigeria’s political system is structured and why Baba-Ahmed, despite his high-profile appointment, was never fully integrated into the political machinery he sought to influence.

Baba-Ahmed’s tenure as Special Adviser on Political Matters was supposed to position him as a crucial player within the president’s political circle. The role, in theory, is significant—acting as a bridge between the president and the country’s political class, advising on political strategy, and helping to navigate the complex relationships between key political figures. Yet, despite the office’s importance, Baba-Ahmed’s appointment was always a mismatch in the eyes of many, especially those who had a foothold in the Lagos political establishment—the very circle from which Tinubu rose to power.

To fully understand why Baba-Ahmed was considered an outsider within Tinubu's inner circle, one must first acknowledge the nature of Nigerian politics. In a system where loyalty is often tied to patronage and where personal connections, godfatherism, and strategic political alliances reign supreme, new entrants into this web often struggle to be fully accepted, especially if they do not have deep roots in the power structure. Baba-Ahmed, despite his impressive career in public service and his intellectual credentials, simply did not belong to the Lagos political network that has long supported Tinubu’s rise to power.

It’s not just a matter of having the right political connections. Nigeria’s political landscape, particularly within the circles surrounding Tinubu, is defined by an intricate web of personal loyalty and shared history. To truly be part of this circle is to share the same ideological framework, to have been part of the struggles, negotiations, and maneuverings that have defined the Tinubu political machine over the years. Baba-Ahmed, although respected for his public service record, did not possess this particular currency. His career as a retired civil servant and academic, no matter how distinguished, did not automatically grant him the clout needed to penetrate the dense political web that governs the country.

It’s easy to imagine that Baba-Ahmed entered the role with certain expectations of what the Special Adviser on Political Matters position could deliver, particularly for someone of his experience. However, the reality of Nigerian politics is starkly different from the ideal. Had Baba-Ahmed taken more time to understand the full extent of the role he was stepping into—by consulting with predecessors in the same position—he might have realized the limited influence he would have in a government built on patronage, factionalism, and power struggles. The office of Special Adviser on Political Matters is important on paper, but in practice, it often operates within very tight, pre-existing power structures that leave little room for outsiders. This would likely have tempered his expectations and provided him with a clearer understanding of his position within the broader political ecosystem.

Baba-Ahmed’s perception of himself as a key player in the administration, capable of steering political strategy and influencing major decisions, was, in some ways, a misreading of the power dynamics at play. For someone who had operated outside of the entrenched political networks for much of his career, it must have been a difficult adjustment. Political influence in Nigeria is rarely a meritocratic affair; it is rooted in years of personal relationships, loyalty, and a shared understanding of how to navigate the delicate balance of power. Baba-Ahmed, no matter how competent or intelligent, was never fully integrated into the group that controls the levers of power. This was not necessarily due to any shortcomings on his part; it was simply the nature of the game.

Baba-Ahmed’s resignation, though framed as a personal decision, speaks volumes about the fractured nature of the administration. His departure from the government illustrates the extent to which Tinubu’s government, despite its lofty ambitions, is struggling with internal cohesion. The sense of isolation Baba-Ahmed speaks of is not a reflection of his personal disconnect but rather a symptom of the broader fragmentation within the administration itself. The president, while navigating complex reforms and managing political dissent, is faced with a network of power players who are either unwilling or unable to fully align with his agenda. This has created a political environment where even a highly qualified appointee like Baba-Ahmed could not find his place.

It is not surprising, then, that Baba-Ahmed’s comments about Tinubu’s isolation resonate deeply with many who have watched Nigerian politics for years. There is a sense that the Tinubu administration, much like its predecessors, is bogged down by the very structures that are supposed to empower it. These structures—built on patronage, cronyism, and political loyalty—have made it difficult for any leader to truly reform the system. Tinubu’s political isolation, as described by Baba-Ahmed, reflects the very nature of Nigerian governance: a system that rewards loyalty and the preservation of the status quo, not innovation or genuine political cohesion.

As Baba-Ahmed moves on from his role, his reflections provide valuable insight into the challenges facing Nigeria’s leadership today. The realities of Nigerian politics cannot be ignored, and for leaders like Tinubu, understanding the deep-rooted loyalties and factionalism that dominate the political landscape is crucial for navigating the labyrinth of power. Baba-Ahmed may have resigned, but his candid interview serves as a reminder of how difficult it is for any outsider, no matter how qualified, to penetrate the inner workings of a political system built on deep and often unspoken alliances.