By: Fabian Apechihin

Kwankwaso made the disclosure on Monday while speaking on Prime Time, a programme on Arise Television.

According to him, many political leaders in Nigeria have failed to understand the mindset, concerns, and aspirations of young Nigerians, especially in the era of social media.

He explained that younger Nigerians are more interested in competent and effective leadership than the ethnic and religious sentiments that often dominate political discussions among older politicians.

“So many things have changed in this country. You have leaders, many of whom don’t even realize what is happening on social media. We have leaders who hardly have any contact with young men and women,” Kwankwaso said.

“People of our age, my age, or especially the age of Atiku, are very few in this country compared to the younger people. The younger people have their own way of thinking, even our children.”

The former Kano governor stated that even within his family, younger members expressed opinions that reflected a desire for political cooperation and better leadership.

“You will be surprised, even during the 2023 election, in my own house, my own daughter was telling me to go and work with Peter Obi,” he said.

“She didn’t say she was obedient, but she wanted me to work together with him, and vice versa.”

Kwankwaso added that while many older politicians remain focused on religion and ethnicity, young Nigerians are more concerned about credible leadership and national progress.

“So you see, there is a lot happening in this country, but people at that level we are talking about don’t even understand,” he stated.

“People are talking about religion. People are talking about ethnicity. People are talking, especially those at our level and age, but the younger people are looking for the right leadership for this country. And I think they are absolutely right.”

By: Fabian Apechihin

Sani made the remarks on Monday during an appearance on Politics Today, a programme on Channels Television.

Reports had emerged last week claiming that Hope Uzodimma was removed as chairman of the Progressive Governors’ Forum and replaced by Peter Mbah following a tense meeting in Abuja.

The reports also alleged that the forum had split into rival factions. While Uzodimma insisted he remained chairman, another bloc was reportedly aligned with Dapo Abiodun and Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq.

However, governors loyal to Uzodimma later passed a vote of confidence in him during a meeting held at the Imo State Lodge in Abuja. President Bola Tinubu was also said to have intervened in the dispute.

Reacting to the controversy, Sani, who serves as vice chairman of the forum, maintained that no leadership change had taken place.

“At the moment, there’s no problem. All the governors are together. His Excellency Hope Uzodimma is the chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum,” he said.

“My humble self, Senator Uba Sani, is the vice chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum.”

The Kaduna governor stated that disagreements are normal in a democratic setting and should not be blown out of proportion.

“In my own opinion, I don’t think it’s a serious issue, like many people try to make it look like it’s a very serious issue,” he said.

“Because, you know, in everything we are talking about democracy, people can choose to disagree and agree. So, in my own opinion, it was just a slight misunderstanding.”

Sani assured party supporters that the matter had been resolved and dismissed speculation of any division within the forum.

“I don’t think you will hear anything again. I can assure you, you can’t hear anything again,” he stated.

“It’s just a slight disagreement, not a serious issue, but a slight disagreement. But it has been resolved.”

He further added that if there had truly been a leadership change, he would have automatically assumed office as chairman in his capacity as vice chairman.

“And of course, if there’s any change of leadership, sitting here as the vice chairman, I could have taken over,” he said.

“But I can tell you, I was there. And I was the one who made that statement clear that we are united. Everything is okay.”

In a statement released by his camp, Atiku maintained that fielding another southern candidate against a sitting southern president would be politically ineffective and unsupported by Nigeria’s democratic history.

According to the statement, opposition leaders should concentrate on forming a strong and united coalition capable of defeating the ruling party rather than making what it described as emotional or symbolic political choices.

Atiku’s camp questioned how a southern opposition candidate could realistically defeat a southern incumbent president.

“At the core of the question is: how does a Southern opposition candidate realistically unseat a sitting Southern president?” the statement read.

It further argued that Nigeria’s political history offers no example of such an outcome, warning that insisting on that strategy could amount to entering the election already defeated.

The statement added that if opposition parties insist on zoning the presidency to the South, they might as well allow Tinubu to seek re-election unchallenged by a rival candidate from the same region.

According to Atiku’s camp, such a strategy lacks the political strength, national spread, and electoral advantage needed to unseat an incumbent president.

The former vice president’s camp also criticised supporters of southern zoning, describing their position as “intellectually dishonest” and disconnected from present political realities.

“Defeating an incumbent president requires realism, not romanticism; strategy, not sentiment; honesty, not selective memory,” the statement added.

It urged opposition politicians to decide whether their focus is on making symbolic political statements or genuinely winning power in the 2027 election.

The statement stressed that opposition politics should be driven by practical electoral calculations and broad national coalition-building rather than emotional considerations.

On the issue of fairness and power rotation, Atiku’s camp argued that by 2027, the South would have spent more years in power than the North during Nigeria’s current democratic dispensation.

According to the statement, the South would have occupied the presidency for 18 years, while the North would have held power for only 10 years within the same period.

“It becomes difficult to understand the justice in an argument that seeks to deepen an already existing imbalance under the guise of equity,” the statement noted.

The camp also accused some supporters of southern zoning of selective memory, recalling that many of them backed former President Goodluck Jonathan in 2011 despite calls at the time for power to return to the North.

“It is intellectually dishonest for those who supported a Southern presidency in 2011 to now posture as custodians of rotational justice,” the statement said.

While acknowledging the Southeast’s aspiration to produce Nigeria’s president, Atiku’s camp criticised what it described as “transactional political bargaining” and “symbolic tokenism.”

The statement warned against political arrangements allegedly aimed at satisfying personal ambitions without creating a genuine and sustainable pathway for the Southeast to attain power.

“Principles do not become sacred only when they align with personal ambition,” the statement concluded.

It urged opposition parties and stakeholders to focus on building a broad-based national alliance capable of defeating Tinubu in 2027 rather than becoming distracted by divisive zoning debates.