I have since realised that those conclusions could only be valid for as long as things remain the way they are. Particularly if President Olusegin Obasanjo, who was helped into office by Babangida, remains head of state and government. We all know that he has paid back this favour by elevating Babangida to the rank of an "untouchable." What further proof of this do we need than the latter’s refusal to appear before the Oputa Panel and the President rationalising it.
However, should Obasanjo leave in year 2007, as we all expect, what would happen to Babangida? I think it is this fear of the unknown, of determination to escape prosecution for countless sins that is driving his aspiration.
I believe Babangida has realised this. He also knows that it is becoming fashionable to bring ex-leaders, who ruled by brute force and/or robbed their people blind, to be brought to book years after leaving office. And this is the kind of treatment he wants to avoid.
The theory that fear is the driving force of Babangida’s current aspiration to become President again come year 2007 is supported by some of the actions he took while he was at the helm of affairs.
We all know that Nigeria had the misfortune of being ruled by him for eight years, from the mid 80s to the early 90s. We know that while in office he had ABSOLUTE power, of life and death, and of spreading fortune or misfortune.That many Nigerians died piecemeal as a result of excruciating poverty to which he plunged the nation. That almost everyone was SAPped out of his or her last ounce of energy.
We know him as the ruler who perhaps did the most economic damage to the greatest number of people in human history. One who caused a whopping $12 billion to disappear from a nation’s treasury and then refused to render any account. Who ridiculed the black race by canceling the fairest election in the history of black nations. Who annihilated a "middle class" of hard working and honest professionals, and replaced them with a despicable class of fraudsters and drug pushers. We know all these about him and many more.
But certain other incidents deserve greater scrutiny to understand this person known as Babangida.
Deception is second nature to this character. Right from the first day he took over in a coup, Babangida set out to deceive Nigerians. I can remember that when Ibrahim "Badamasi" Babangida was announced over the radio as the nation’s new head of state, the Yoruba people of the South West (including my parents) lept up for joy, believing his middle name was "Gbadamosi", and that he was from Ogbomosho. Before then, as Chief of Army Staff, there was nothing like "Badamasi" in his name. We were to witness several other acts of deception during his misrule.
Treachery is another constant feature in Babangida’s life. This is examplified by the betrayal of late Bukar Sukar Dimka, at an hour the coup plotter had a 50 per cent chance of success (Dimka was later to pay with his life for trusting Babangida), and the annulment of the 1993 presidential election won by Abiola, who later died while trying to claim his mandate.
Even if the betrayal of Dimka could be excused, what happened to Abiola speak volume about who Babangida truly is. The Abiola case is very instructive. This was the man who made it possible for Babangida to seize power. Even though some might criticise him (Abiola) for this, while others might argue that he was well rewarded, the truth is that he would not have contested the election if Babangida had not assured him, in a way that he (Abiola) became truly convinced, that he was ready to hand-over. We all know what happened after Abiola won the election.
Another incident worthy of examination in trying to understand Babangida is the execution of Mamman Vatsa, the Best Man at his wedding. Till date, there are still doubts as to whether Vatsa really conceived any coup along with others executed with him. About three years ago, I met a retired Airforce Officer, who swore that one of the aircraft purportedly meant to be used for the violent overthrow of Babangida was under his command. That nothing like a coup could be said to be in the offing, given the situation on the ground then.
So, why would a man kill the Best Man at his wedding, for an alleged offence not proven beyond doubt? We all know that the guilty verdict was passed by a military tribunal composed of ‘Yes Men’, while the trial itself was held in camera. The answer, it seems obvious, was to strike fear in the hearts of everyone.
To deter other coups, especially given that the incident happened in very early days of the regime.
To consolidate his hold on power. You might call this Machiavellian tactics. But I call it a sign of extreme wickedness. And it is said that wicked men are cowards at heart.
Babangida needs power in his own hands or those of his surrogates to assure himself of his safety. He could not leave his fate in the hands of those whom he could not trust. Think about it: all those who have ruled Nigeria since his stepping aside were people he could trust - Shonekan, Abacha, Abdulsalam and Obasanjo. He had something to do with their being in power.
No doubt trouble looms for Babangida from May 29, 2007. If on that day Obasanjo hands over to anyone over whom IBB has no stranglehold, then it would be dawn of his day of reckoning.
The political ambition of Babangida is driven by the fear of the unknown. The future is so unsure for this dictator. And power is the only guarantee of his safety.