The statement that a sitting President “may make history as the last President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria” is not just political rhetoric; it is an alarm bell signaling a profound crisis of faith in the nation-state. During the tenure of President Muhammadu Buhari, this fear—the prospect of Nigeria’s disintegration—was arguably more widespread and vocal than at any time since the Civil War.
This sentiment was rooted in the perceived failure of the state to manage concurrent crises that threatened the foundational unity of the country. When people search for this keyword, they are looking for an explanation of the core challenges that made secession and ethnic division feel like a genuine, immediate threat.
We will unpack the three major factors that converged during that period, leading to intense national debate about the sustainability of the Nigerian union.
The Convergence of Crises: Unity Under Pressure
The speculation about Nigeria’s potential collapse did not arise from a single event but from the sustained failure to resolve three overlapping crises, each exacerbating the others.
A. The Explosion of Insecurity and Banditry
The most immediate cause for alarm was the complete breakdown of security across multiple regions. While the anti-Boko Haram war continued, new, more decentralized threats emerged:
-
Banditry in the North-West: Widespread kidnappings, mass killings, and cattle rustling made parts of the North ungovernable.
-
Farmer-Herder Conflict: This conflict intensified, often taking on ethnic and religious dimensions that pitted communities against each other across the Middle Belt and South.
-
The Psychological Toll: When the state fails to provide the basic security of life and property, citizens naturally begin to look to their ethnic or regional groups for protection. This is the first step toward the delegitimization of the federal center. If the center cannot hold, regions will seek self-preservation.
B. The Resurgence of Secessionist Movements
The insecurity provided fertile ground for ethnic nationalism to thrive. Two primary movements gained significant traction:
-
IPOB and Biafra Agitation: The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), demanding the secession of the South-East, became highly mobilized. Their narrative centered on historical grievances, economic marginalization, and the belief that the Nigerian state was systemically biased against the Igbo people.
-
Yoruba Nation Agitation: Calls for the creation of the Yoruba Nation (Odua Republic) in the South-West also intensified, driven by economic concerns and frustration over the perceived invasion and insecurity caused by nomadic elements in their region.
These demands were no longer whispers; they were loud, public movements that challenged the legality and morality of the Federal Republic itself.
The Crisis of Trust and Perceived Sectionalism
Beyond the external threats of insecurity and secession, internal political decisions significantly fueled the fear of national fracture. Many observers argued that the administration’s response to these crises appeared heavily sectional and biased.
A. Appointments and Lopsided Representation
One of the most persistent criticisms against the Buhari administration was the perceived lopsidedness of key appointments, particularly in the security and intelligence sectors. Critics argued that the overwhelming concentration of power in the hands of individuals from one specific ethnic and religious demographic alienated large parts of the South and Middle Belt.
-
The Political Damage: This signaled a return to the politics of exclusion, making millions of Nigerians feel like second-class citizens. If an administration cannot demonstrate balanced representation, it struggles to command national loyalty and further fuels the secessionist narrative that “this country is not for everyone.”
B. Differential Response to Conflict
The administration’s handling of different security challenges was also scrutinized. Many felt there was a perceived difference in the approach to managing the farmer-herder crisis (which was seen as being handled with kid gloves) versus the immediate, heavy-handed military response directed at pro-Biafra agitators.
This perceived double standard led to the dangerous conclusion that the Federal Government was protecting certain ethnic interests while actively suppressing others. This perception directly fueled the narrative that the current constitutional arrangement was unsustainable and biased, leading to the logical (if extreme) conclusion that the country was nearing its end.
The Economic Fuel on the Fire
The final accelerant to the fear of collapse was the severe economic downturn. High inflation, two recessions, and soaring unemployment meant that the average Nigerian was poorer at the end of the Buhari era than at the start.
-
The Link to Unity: When the economy is growing, people focus on opportunity. When the economy shrinks, people focus on who to blame. Economic hardship sharpens ethnic and regional divisions, making people believe that they would be better off controlling their own resources and destinies in a smaller, separate state. The Biafra and Odua agendas, therefore, were often framed as the only path to economic salvation for their people.
The Enduring Question: The Glue of Nigeria
While President Buhari successfully handed over power in 2023, the underlying tensions that birthed the “last president” fear have not vanished. The keyword we are reviving speaks to a fundamental reality: Nigeria’s unity is conditional.
It is conditional on:
-
Equity: All citizens must feel that the state is fair and belongs to everyone.
-
Security: The government must guarantee the safety of life and property everywhere, impartially.
-
Economic Opportunity: The youth must see a future within the Federal Republic.
The lasting legacy of that period is the profound realization that the failure of national leadership to deliver these three conditions will perpetually renew the existential question: Is this union worth fighting for? The fear that Buhari could have been the last president was a dire warning to all subsequent leaders: unity is a project that must be actively and equitably rebuilt every day.
