I have never responded to a rejoinder in my career as a writer. Not out of arrogance, not out of disdain, and certainly not because criticism unsettles me. I have avoided rejoinders because Nigerian political rebuttals are almost always predictable exercises in ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments, and whataboutism, carefully designed to evade substance while appearing combative.

This response would ordinarily not deserve an exception.

But it does — because Nasir El-Rufai was dragged into it, my article was grossly misrepresented, and a presidential spokesperson chose to speak not with facts, but with contempt, generalisation and dangerous logic that goes beyond disagreement into national harm.

The article in question — “Is Tinubu Waging a Quiet War on the Muslim North – or Is It All Coincidence?” — was written by me. El-Rufai did not write it. He did not annotate it. He did not endorse it. He simply shared it.

Yet the Presidency, through a rejoinder written by Sa’adiyyah Adebisi Hassan and amplified by Bayo Onanuga, assumed that El-Rufai’s share amounted to ownership and endorsement — and proceeded to attack him personally while falsely converting questions into accusations.

By the Presidency’s own logic, therefore, Onanuga’s decision to share that rejoinder makes its contents the position of the Federal Government. That logic compels a response — not to El-Rufai, but to the claims, assumptions, and implications now stamped with presidential authority.

Questions Were Turned Into “Allegations” — Deliberately

My article made no accusation. It explicitly stated that no motive was imputed and no allegation made. It laid out patterns, silences, and outcomes, and asked whether Nigerians were witnessing coincidence or political calculation ahead of 2027.

The rejoinder lied about that — outright — by claiming I alleged that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was “waging a quiet war” against the Muslim North.

That distortion was necessary, because it is easier to attack a false allegation than to answer an honest question.

From Rebuttal to Blame: Demonising the Muslim North

Unable to answer the substance, the rejoinder adopted a far more reckless approach: collective blame.

It argued that because Northern Muslims held major security and political offices under President Muhammadu Buhari — and Nigeria performed poorly — then Muslim Northern leadership itself is the problem.

This is not just dishonest; it is incendiary.

By that logic, governance failure becomes a religious and regional crime, not a policy failure. And when that argument comes not from a street agitator but from a government-aligned voice, it becomes extremely dangerous.

Let us carry that same logic forward — honestly.

The Logic Boomerang the FG Did Not Think Through

If Buhari’s failure is assigned to Muslim Northerners because of their presence in power, then what does Tinubu’s performance say today?

As of now:

President: Bola Ahmed Tinubu — South
Senate President: Godswill Akpabio — South
Chief Justice of Nigeria: From the South

If logic is consistent, then the current outcomes reflect Southern leadership performance.

But that logic is wrong — and that is the point.

Nigeria’s failures are not the failure of any religion or region. They are the failure of policy, elite insulation, poor sequencing of reforms, and indifference to human cost. To suggest otherwise is to reopen the darkest chapters of Nigerian history — this time with official condescension.

The Data the FG Carefully Avoided

The rejoinder made loud claims that Tinubu is “doing the right thing”, that competence has replaced religion, and that Nigeria is moving forward.

The numbers say otherwise.

Poverty has risen from about 40–46% before May 2023 to 54–60% in 2024–2025, pushing 30–40 million Nigerians into poverty.