Connect with us

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Obism—The test of translating a movement into electoral victory votes

Published

3 years ago

on

“The duo of Obi and Datti Baba-Ahmed remains the most qualified team that could steer this country in a different direction. However, a possible victory hangs on how this movement could strategically circumvent a dysfunctional balloting process and navigate past the finish line of electoral victory.” ―Anthony Obi Ogbo

________________________

During a strategic group meeting of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) held shortly before the 2015 election at a castle on Puerta Vista Lane in Houston, TX, Hon. Dan Ulasi, a strategist with the party at the time, shocked his party enthusiasts when he hinted that their flagbearer and incumbent, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, might not make it to the next tenure. According to Ulasi, with time running out, the campaign was not organized on the ground, did not weigh the electoral map options, and had no strategies to counter a possible ballot mishandling. A few months after this prediction, the Jonathan regime crumbled like a soggy, oil-drenched Ijebu fried plantain.

 

Thus, one of the major reasons Goodluck Jonathan fell in the 2015 presidential race was his campaign’s inability to explore on-the-ground winning strategies. Overconfident and blind to ideas, his team relied on three major factors: a rousing social media blare, the power of incumbency, and public hatred for his archrival, Muhammadu Buhari.

Currently, Nigeria is faced with yet another chance to turn over a new regime leaf. At the forefront of Nigeria’s politics is the Peter Obi movement tagged Obism. The subject, Peter Gregory Obi, a businessman and politician who served as the Governor of Anambra State two separate times, is the Labour Party nominee for President of Nigeria in the 2023 presidential election. Obi’s campaign supporters gradually metamorphosed into an inspiring political movement, spreading across the nation like wildfire. Most passionate about this cause is the younger population. They took their excitement to the internet and infiltrated social media with campaign literature, including videos, catchphrases, and memes.

While all core supporters of Obi might be classified as “Obidients,” it must also be noted that in reality, there are just two categories: the Obi campaign strategists and the Obidients. The campaign strategists within the Peter Obi Support Network (POSN) are result-driven individuals focused on creating working avenues to get Obi elected. Armed with good funds and the right message, they remain the foremost support network that is crowdfunding for Peter Obi’s presidential campaigns.

In contrast, the Obidients are desperate do-or-die fanatics blind to the complexities of prevailing political terrain but driven by emotions and unquestioning enthusiasm borne out of frustration over the country’s decades of economic, social, and political meltdown. They are good, too, but often embarrass their candidate with messages incompatible with his electioneering ideology.

They are uncontrollable and flood social media platforms with video clips and poster messages conflicting with or perhaps contradicting what their candidate stands for. For example, the campaign understands the “Igbo fear factor” in Nigerian politics and has been working hard to portray its candidate as an ethnically blind figure who would unite the country. In sheer contrast, some Obidient fanatics are busy spewing messages about the inevitability of electing Obi as bait to win the Igbos into the national fold—an approach that might attract mistrust and fear among voters of northern swing states. Similarly, they have played into the hands of the opposition by unintelligibly engaging in social media tribal wars that further portray their candidate as a tribal leader.

Organizers must not be confused between an ideological movement and running a political campaign

Obism or “Obidience” is a movement, yet organizers must not be confused between an ideological movement and running a political campaign in Nigeria—a nation with a terrible electioneering record. The success of any mobilization structure for political advancement must entail strategic planning, organizing, fundraising, and mobilization of individuals.

Without a doubt, Obism is trending. Yet there are concerns about carrying the momentum beyond the current emotional excitement, social media buzz, and sometimes, annoying bombastic optimism. Do not get me wrong. Those lines are still influential in building and sustaining a campaign. However, strategies are yet to be seen for taking advantage of this movement and pushing momentum through the finishing lines of electoral victory. Just yesterday, at a mega rally in Houston, Texas, a supposed spokesman for the Obidient repeatedly announced that voters should ignore parties and vote for individuals—an indication that those fanatics are clueless about where the campaign is headed.

The Obidient fanatics have also bastardized his “shishi” ideology. “We no dey give shishi” is an anti-bribery maxim highlighting the candidate’s ethical decency in a country where corruption is an anthem. Unfortunately, the Obidient fanatics have pushed this mantra beyond the lines, discouraging prospective campaign workers, performing artists, and media platforms with a fictitious belief that the campaign is structured only to employ volunteers who would use their own money and resources.

There has to be alignment to sustain a winning approach. The campaign strategists could bring the fanatics into the fold and curtail their excesses by facilitating their campaign messages and other strategic advances to align with their electioneering mission. Actors, actresses, and performing artists must not be dissuaded by the “We no dey give shishi” mantra; rather, they must be engaged with attractive cash rewards to lead the grassroots voter mobilization drive. Polling booths are located neither on Instagram nor TikTok.

Polling booths are located neither on Instagram nor TikTok.

Just yesterday, one day before the closing of the Continuous Voter Registration (CVR) exercise, some hoodlums stormed the facility of St. Brigid Catholic Church Ijesha Lagos, where thousands of late registrants gathered and made away with all the equipment and materials. There was also similar news in several parts of the country, especially in the Southeast. The campaign must mobilize groups to monitor and coordinate polling locations before the election, to deter opposition vandals from election day ballot-snatching surprises. It worked in Edo’s previous gubernatorial race.

The candidate, Obi, has virtually traveled through the entire nation. Yet, it is worrisome that two other major rivals, Atiku Abubakar (Peoples Democratic Party) and Bola Tinubu (the All-Progressives Congress), are not vigorously campaigning. Both candidates, who are richer than Nigeria, have a history of buying their ways through any process and have successfully demonstrated this on many occasions.

The duo of Obi and Datti Baba-Ahmed remains the most qualified team that could steer this country in a different direction. However, a possible victory hangs on how this movement could strategically circumvent a dysfunctional balloting process and navigate past the finish line of electoral victory.

Let us be clear about Nigerian politics. Knowing Nigeria is one thing. Understanding its intricate politics requires unique competencies unavailable on Google. Nigeria’s political setting transcends the electoral process and often entails inconceivably crooked ballot handling. The three most crucial winning structures are facilitating and sustaining an on-the-ground poll army, strategic coordination of electoral maps, and the ability to counter ballot mishandling and falsification of ballot figures.

In the electioneering trade, a movement represents an ideology, a campaign is a project. Team Obi could use this movement to build a winning campaign.  It may sound unprofessional, but to tear through the walls of Nigeria’s electoral challenges, the Obi campaign must, at some point, play dirty. The capacity of this approach will not be discussed in this article, but as the African Ancestors would caution, to pound food on the mortar or to pound on a bare floor is a choice.

♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Journalism and RTF Professor, Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D. is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Anthony Obi Ogbo

When Air Power Becomes a Christmas Performance: The Illusion of Success in Trump’s Nigerian Strike

Published

2 weeks ago

on

December 28, 2025

By

“Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

When President Trump announced his authorized United States air strike against ISIL (ISIS) fighters in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day, there was an immediate burst of celebration on Nigerian social media. For a country exhausted by years of kidnappings, massacres, and territorial insecurity, the announcement sounded like long-awaited international support. Memes circulated, praise poured in, and some Nigerians hailed Trump as a decisive global sheriff finally willing to act where others hesitated.

But after the initial euphoria settled, a sobering assessment emerged: the strike appeared less like a strategic military intervention and more like a made-for-television spectacle designed to burnish Trump’s international strongman image.

This was not the first time the United States has launched air strikes in Africa or the Sahel under the banner of counterterrorism. From Libya to Somalia, from Syria to Yemen, U.S. “precision strikes” have often been announced with confidence and celebrated with press briefings—only for the targeted groups to regroup, mutate, and, in some cases, expand their reach. In Nigeria itself, years of foreign-backed security assistance have failed to decisively neutralize Boko Haram or its ISIS-affiliated offshoots. Instead, violence has fragmented, spread, and grown more complex.

No verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated

The Nigerian strike followed a familiar pattern. U.S. officials framed it as a blow against ISIS-West Africa Province (ISWAP), a group aligned with the global ISIS network. Trump’s language suggested a decisive intervention—an act of muscular diplomacy signaling that America still projects power where it chooses. Yet no verifiable evidence has been produced to confirm high-value ISIS targets were eliminated, leadership structures dismantled, or operational capacity degraded.

What followed was a digital smokescreen. Social media accounts, many anonymous and unverified, began circulating gruesome images of dead bodies and destroyed villages—photos long associated with banditry in Nigeria’s northwest. These images were quickly repurposed to “prove” the success of Trump’s strike. However, this is where the narrative falls apart under scrutiny.

Trump’s mission, as publicly stated, was to target ISIS. Not bandits. Not kidnappers. Not rural criminal gangs. ISIS is a transnational terrorist organization with ideological, financial, and operational links across continents. Bandits, by contrast, are primarily armed criminal groups—motivated by ransom, cattle theft, and territorial control, not global jihad. Conflating the two may be politically convenient, but it is analytically dishonest.

Killing or displacing bandits does not equate to dismantling ISIS. In fact, indiscriminate or poorly targeted air strikes often worsen the situation, pushing criminal groups to radicalize, splinter, or align with extremist factions for protection and legitimacy. This pattern has been observed repeatedly in conflict zones where military force substitutes for intelligence-driven strategy.

A truly successful counterterrorism raid is not measured by dramatic announcements or viral images. It is measured by clear, verifiable outcomes, including the confirmed elimination of high-ranking commanders, disruption of recruitment and financing networks, seizure of weapons caches, and—most importantly—sustained reductions in civilian attacks. None of these benchmarks has been credibly demonstrated in the aftermath of Trump’s Nigerian air strike.

Instead, Nigeria wakes up to the same grim reality: villages remain vulnerable, highways unsafe, and communities terrorized. The strike did not change the security equation. It did not empower Nigerian forces. It did not restore civilian confidence. And it certainly did not neutralize ISIS as a strategic threat.

This air strike offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.

In that sense, the air strike was not merely ineffective—it was a failure dressed in the language of strength, executed for optics, and amplified for political gain. It offered Nigerians symbolism, not security.

If the goal is truly to eliminate ISIS and its affiliates in West Africa, the path is neither theatrical nor unilateral. It requires robust intelligence sharing, sustained training, and real-time coordination with Nigerian and regional forces. It demands targeted arms assistance, logistical support, and investments in surveillance capabilities that allow local militaries to act decisively and lawfully. Above all, it requires a long-term commitment to strengthening state capacity—not fleeting air shows announced from afar.

Bombs alone do not defeat ideology. Precision without intelligence is noise. And celebration without results is self-deception. Trump’s Nigerian air strike may have produced headlines, but history will remember it for what it was: a failed mission masquerading as success.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Trump’s Nigeria Strike: Bombs, Boasts, and the Illusion of Victory

Published

2 weeks ago

on

December 26, 2025

By

“With Obama, Al-Qaeda was not eliminated by noise; it was suffocated by intelligence.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

It has now been confirmed that the United States acted in collaboration with Nigeria in the recent strike on Islamic State elements in northwest Nigeria. That cooperation deserves recognition. Intelligence-sharing between Washington and Abuja is necessary, overdue, and welcome. Terrorism is transnational; defeating it requires allies, not isolation.

But let us be clear: bombs alone do not defeat terror. And Donald Trump’s strike—trumpeted loudly on social media before facts, casualties, or strategy were disclosed—was less a turning point than a performance.

Trump’s announcement was a classic spectacle: “powerful,” “deadly,” “perfect strikes.” No numbers. No clarity. No accountability. Just noise. It was the same choreography America has deployed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia—places where U.S. airpower landed hard, headlines screamed victory, and instability deepened afterward. Violence escalated. Militancy adapted. Civilians paid the price.

History is unkind to airstrikes sold as solutions.

Nigeria knows this better than anyone. Long before Trump’s tweet, the Nigerian military had already conducted multiple operations in the same terror corridor. At least five major strikes and offensives stand out:

  • First, Operation Hadarin Daji, launched to dismantle bandit and terror camps across Zamfara, Katsina, and Sokoto, involving sustained air and ground assaults.
  • Second, Operation Tsaftan Daji, which targeted terrorist hideouts in the Kamuku and Sububu forests—precisely the terrain now in the headlines.
  • Third, repeated Nigerian Air Force precision strikes in the Zurmi–Shinkafi axis, neutralizing commanders and destroying logistics hubs.
  • Fourth, joint operations with Nigerien forces, disrupting cross-border supply routes used by ISIS-linked groups.
  • Fifth, recent coordinated offensives involving intelligence-led raids, special forces insertions, and follow-up ground clearing in the northwest.

These were not symbolic gestures. They were Nigerian-led, Nigerian-funded, Nigerian-executed. And yet, there were no fireworks on social media. No flag-waving hysteria. No intoxicated praise of Nigerian commanders as saviors of civilization.

Why? Because there is a dangerous segment of Nigerians who suffer from what can only be called the American Wonder mentality—a colonial hangover that applauds anything louder simply because it comes from Washington. The same Nigerians who ignore their own soldiers dying in silence suddenly abandon Christmas meals to celebrate Trump’s tweets, typing incoherent praise, mangling grammar, and mistaking spectacle for substance.

It is embarrassing. And it is intellectually lazy.

Terrorism is not defeated by volume or virality. It is defeated by intelligence—quiet, patient, unglamorous work. The United States knows this. Barack Obama understood it. Al-Qaeda was not dismantled through social media theatrics or chest-thumping declarations. It was weakened through intelligence fusion, financial disruption, targeted operations, local partnerships, and relentless pressure on leadership networks—mostly without fanfare.

Obama did not tweet. He acted. So what actually works against groups like ISIS in Nigeria?

First, intelligence supremacy. Human intelligence from local communities, defectors, and infiltrators matters more than bombs. Terror groups survive on secrecy. Break that, and they collapse.

Second, financial and logistical strangulation. Terrorists run on money, fuel, arms, and food. Cut access to smuggling routes, illicit mining, ransom flows, and cross-border trade, and their operational capacity withers.

Third, community stabilization and governance. Terrorism thrives where the state is absent. Roads, schools, policing, and justice systems matter. People who trust the state do not shelter terrorists.

Fourth, regional coordination, not episodic strikes. Nigeria, Niger, Chad, and Burkina Faso must sustain joint pressure, not reactive operations driven by headlines.

Airstrikes can support these strategies—but only as tools, never as substitutes.

Trump’s strike may have killed militants. It may have disrupted camps. That is commendable. But it is not a solution. It is a moment. And moments, without strategy, fade.

If Nigerians truly want terror defeated, they should stop worshiping foreign loudness and start demanding disciplined intelligence, consistent policy, and respect for the men and women already fighting on the ground.

Real victories are quiet. Real security is built, not tweeted.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Texas’ 18th Congressional District Runoff: Amanda Edwards Deserves This Seat

Published

3 weeks ago

on

December 18, 2025

By

“Her persistence and long-term investment make a clear case: she has earned this opportunity.“ —Anthony Obi Ogbo

In the special election to fill Texas’s 18th Congressional District, no candidate won a majority on November 4, 2025, leading to a January 31, 2026, runoff between Democratic frontrunners Christian Menefee and Amanda Edwards. Menefee, Harris County Attorney, led the field with roughly 29% of the vote, while former Houston City Council member Edwards finished second with about 26%. Both are vying to represent a district left vacant after the death of U.S. Rep. Sylvester Turner.

The 18th Congressional District is far more than a geographic area. Anchored in Houston’s historic Black communities, it is a political and cultural stronghold shaped by civil rights history, faith institutions, and grassroots activism. Sheila Jackson Lee represented this district for nearly three decades (1995–2024), becoming more than a legislator—she was a constant presence at churches, funerals, protests, and community milestones. For residents, her leadership carried spiritual weight, reflecting stewardship, protection, and a deep, almost pastoral guardianship of the district. Her tenure symbolized continuity, cultural pride, and a profound connection with the people she served.

Houstonians watched as Jackson Lee entered the 2023 Houston mayoral race, attempting to transition from Congress to city leadership. Despite high-profile endorsements, including outgoing Mayor Sylvester Turner and national Democratic figures, she lost the December 9, 2023, runoff to State Senator John Whitmire by a wide margin. Following that defeat, Jackson Lee filed to run for re-election to her U.S. House seat, even as Edwards—who had briefly joined the mayoral race before withdrawing—remained in the congressional primary.

At that time, Jackson Lee’s health was visibly declining, yet voters still supported her, honoring decades of service. She defeated Edwards in the 2024 Democratic primary before announcing her battle with pancreatic cancer. Her passing in July 2024 left the seat vacant.

Edwards, already a candidate, sought to fill the seat, but timing and party rules intervened. Because Jackson Lee died too late for a regular primary, Harris County Democratic Party precinct chairs selected a replacement nominee. Former Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner, a retired but widely respected figure, narrowly edged out Edwards for the nomination, effectively blocking her despite her prior campaigning efforts. Turner won the general election but died in March 2025, triggering a special election in 2025, in which Edwards advanced to a runoff.

The January 31, 2026, runoff will hinge on turnout, coalition-building, and key endorsements. Both candidates led a crowded November field but fell short of a majority, with Menefee narrowly ahead. Endorsements such as State Rep. Jolanda Jones’ support for Edwards could consolidate key Democratic blocs, particularly among Black women and progressive voters. In a heavily Democratic district where voter confusion and turnout patterns have been inconsistent, the candidate who best mobilizes supporters and unites constituencies is likely to prevail.

Amanda Edwards’ case is compelling. Although both candidates share similar values and qualifications, her claim rests on dedication, consistency, and timing that have been repeatedly denied. She pursued this seat with focus and purpose, maintaining a steady commitment to the district and its future. Her path was interrupted by the prolonged political ambitions of Jackson Lee and Turner—figures whose stature reshaped the race but delayed generational transition. Edwards did not step aside; she remained visible, engaged, and prepared. In a moment demanding both continuity and renewal, her persistence and long-term investment make a clear case: she has earned this opportunity.

This race comes down to trust, perseverance, and demonstrated commitment. Amanda Edwards has consistently shown up for the district, even when political circumstances repeatedly delayed her chance. Her dedication reflects readiness, respect for the electorate, and an unwavering commitment to service. Voting for Amanda Edwards is not only justified—it is the right choice for Houston’s 18th Congressional District.

♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Trending