Opinion

Jonathan And 2011: God Is Against Opposition

Published

15 years ago

October 10, 2010

“So that whoever resists the authorities opposes what Godhas established, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.”(Rom. 13:1, ISV) “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God”. Moses also said, “you will know that it was the LORD when He gives you meat to eat in the evening and all the bread you want in the morning, because He has heard your grumbling against him. Who are we? You are not grumbling against us, but against the LORD.”(Ex.16:8). The growing opposition against the candidature of President Goodluck Jonathan from within Peoples Democratic Party in one hand and from a cross section of core North on the other is a testimony to God’s approval of his candidature. The reasons for the opposition and gang up point to the fact that President Jonathan is God’s appointed leader to lead Nigeria, this time.

Take a look at the emergence of President Jonathan as president. He never contested for election. It was divine intervention, without which he couldn’t have been there. The major domineering ethnic groups in Nigeria would not have allowed him to assume office as president, if they have their way. God, in his providence never allowed any sectional, tribal and religious sentiment to zone or allocate the office to them. In the same way, God has decided that President Goodluck Jonathan will be the candidate of PDP and win 2011 election as president in spite of the opposition and gang up. This is attested to by the Scriptures cited above.

Jonathan government and candidature is God instituted authority, that anyone who opposes his candidature opposes God and invites God’s judgment. God is in control of the affairs of Nigeria. It is not the private zonal arrangement of neither PDP nor Nigerian Constitution that is at stake but the destiny of the people of Nigeria. Only the sovereign God determines and He has decided the leadership to be executed by President Jonathan for the welfare and progress of this nation. That God is in control and He is against opposition to His instituted leadership is seen from how God dethroned the opposition of Satan in Heaven (see Rev. 12 and Isa. 28). In the Bible, God hates opposition to His rule and anyone who stands in the way of His chosen leader, He destroyed or removed (see Numb. 16, Ex. 16).

Let more people come out to contest. Let the gang up go on. Let the tribal warlords and religious bigots continue to manipulate and use Boko Haram or the military, they cannot stop God’s plans to have President Jonathan elected president come 2011. Some of these opposers will not live to witness the swearing in because God’s judgment will take them out of the way before then.(Ps. 33:10-11, Isa. 14:24-27).

Why l think Jonathan is God’s choice and would win the election come 2011 is based on the Christian philosophy and exhortation of the Scriptures. The Nehemiah example suffice that all obstacles and opposition will give way in due time under God. Nehemiah 4:9-11. “But we prayed to our God and posted a guard day and night to meet this threat. Meanwhile, the people in Judah said, “The strength of the labourers is giving out, and there is so much rubble that we cannot rebuild the wall.” Also our enemies said, “Before they know it or see us, we will be right there among them and will kill them and put an end to the work.”

When you have a project to do or a mission to accomplish, how do you view obstacles and opposition? Do you see insurmountable barriers forcing you to quit, or do you see hurdles challenging you to jump and keep going? In his project to rebuild the wall around the city of Jerusalem, Nehemiah was faced with a number of obstacles and significant enemy opposition. If we had been in Nehemiah’s sandals, many of us would have thrown in the towel because of the obstacles and opposition. Some of us would even have concluded that God had “closed the door,” because the obstacles and opposition seemed so great. But Nehemiah did not quit. He saw the obstacles and opposition as hurdles to be overcome in order to complete God’s work.

Every type of obstacle and every form of opposition that Nehemiah faced in rebuilding the wall of Jerusalem is an illustration from God’s Word of the obstacles and opposition that we can expect to face as Christians. When we become involved in serving the Lord and “building the walls” of personal or corporate Christian testimony, we will definitely face obstacles and opposition. The steps that Nehemiah took in overcoming the roadblocks that he faced are recorded by the Holy Spirit so that we can learn and follow God’s methods for defeating the enemy. How will God come in if there are no obstacles and opposition from within and without PDP?

2011 is a defining moment for God to show Himself strong on behalf of the Christians in Nigeria. The election shall be peaceful. The elections shall be free, fair and transparent. All those planning evil shall fail. For once God shall reign in the affairs of the Nigerian people. It did happen in time of Nehemiah: Nehemiah 4:7 “ But when Sanballat, Tobiah, the Arabs, the Ammonites and the men of Ashdod heard that the repairs to Jerusalem’s walls had gone ahead and that the gaps were being closed, they were very angry. They all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and stir up trouble against it.” Sanballat was governor of Samaria, the region just north of Judea, where Jerusalem was located.

Perhaps, Sanballat had hopes of becoming governor of Judah as well; however, the arrival of Nehemiah spoiled his plans. We first read about Sanballat and Tobiah in chapter 2 when Nehemiah first arrived in Jerusalem. They opposed him from the very beginning!

There are several possible reasons why Sanballat and Tobiah, who were government officials of nearby Samaria, were so disturbed by the arrival of Nehemiah and his small group of exiles. The first possibility is because in the past, the exiles had refused to accept help from the Samaritans and it had caused a bad relationship between the two (Ezra 1 and 2). The second possibility could be that Nehemiah was not like the other exiles. He was the King’s personal assistant. He was cup bearer of the King. They knew that Nehemiah had the approval of the King to build and fortify Jerusalem. If anyone could rebuild Jerusalem, Nehemiah could! The rebuilding of Jerusalem was a threat to the authority of the Samaritan officials who had been in charge since the exile of Judah.

Another possibility of why these men opposed Nehemiah and his work could be that Nehemiah’s group was the third group to return from exile. The population was increasing as more and more exiles returned and this made Sanballat and Tobiah angry. They did not want the exiles to return and take back the land because this was a threat to their secure positions. Why do these northerners and a section of Nigerians oppose Jonathan’s candidature? It is not far from what happened in Nehemiah’s days. President Jonathan represents God’s favour and development of Nigeria.

The responses of Nehemiah’s leadership to opposition should be the principle and practice of Jonathan’s campaign team now. Through prayer and Godly dedication and determination, Nehemiah overcame the obstacles associated with obtaining the necessary permission and royal visas. Perhaps, he even had to overcome the opposition of family and friends in Persia: “Listen, Nehemiah, God has blessed you and placed you high in the ranks of the Persian emperor’s cabinet! It’s more important for you to keep your position right here in Susa! Those lazy Jews in Jerusalem should take care of their own broken-down walls!” Be prepared! These kinds of general obstacles and opposition are normal—they “go with the territory” of just about any job you decide to do for the Lord. When we become involved in serving the Lord and “building the wall” of Christian testimony in any way, we will probably face scorn and derision in one form or another. Have you ever been laughed at for using the Bible as an authoritative resource for daily living? Have you ever been ridiculed for trusting in God? Have you ever been called a “country bumpkin” for believing in creation? Expect to be mocked as a Christian—its part of the enemy’s strategy!

How did Nehemiah deal with the derision and contempt of the enemy? He prayed specifically about the problem—and he continued to build (4:4-5). President Jonathan should ignore the opposition, pray and go on leading. Govern, don’t play politics with governance, you will succeed. Stay blessed.

Akpogena resides in Port Harcourt.

Lewis Akpogena

Opinion

Trans-Kalabari Road: Work In Progress

Published

2 days ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”This Dream project is one of the best things that have happened to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas in recent times.”

This is the concluding part of this story featured in our last edition.

Good road network helps farmers to convey their agro-allied products to commercial hubs where buyers and sellers meet periodically to transact business. Road network engineers and motivates people resident in unfriendly geographical terrains, like riverine areas, to own property and shuttle home with ease. Some people will prefer living in their own houses in a more serene and nature-blessed communities to living in the city that is fraught with pollution, and other environmental, social and economic hazards. Prior to the cult epidemic that ravaged parts of Rivers State, the Emohuas, Elemes, Ogonis, and Etches were known for rural dwelling. Most public servants from these areas do their official and private transactions from their villages. For them it was comparatively easier to live in the village and engage in a diversified economic endeavours through farming, fishing or other lucrative business without outrageous charges and embarrassment associated with doing business in Port Harcourt, where land is as scarce as the traditional needle.

That is why the decision to construct the Trans-Kalabari Road by the administration of Dr. Peter Odili was one of the best decisions that administration took. When Dr. Odili vacated office as the Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi took over and awarded contracts for continuation of the road project which in my considered view is the felt need of the people of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. Unfortunately, Rt. Hon. Amaechi’s efforts to drive the project was sabotaged by some contractors some of whom are Kalabari people. The main Trans-Kalabari Road is one project that is dear to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas of Rivers State. This is because through the road commuters can easily access several communities in the three local government areas. For instance, the road when completed will enable access to eight of the ten communities in Degema Local Government Area, namely: Bukuma, Tombia, Bakana, Oguruama, Obuama, Usokun, Degema town and the Degema Consulate. It will also link 15 of the 16 communities in Asari Toru Local Government Area. The communities are: Buguma, the local government headquarters, Ido, Abalama, Tema, Sama, Okpo, Ilelema, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama, Krakrama, Omekwe-Ama, Angulama. The road will also connect 14 of 17 wards in Akuku Toru Local Government Area, and other settlements. It is interesting to note that It is faster, and far more convenient and economical for the catchment Communities on the Trans-Kalabari Road network to go to the State Capital than the East West Road. The people of the three local government areas will prefer to work or do their transactions in Port Harcourt from their respective communities to staying in Port Harcourt where the house rent and the general cost of living is astronomically high.

Consequently, development will seamlessly spread to the 28 out of 34 communities of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. The only Communities that are not linked by the road project are Oporoama in Asari Toru, the Ke and Bille Communities in Degema Local Government Area and the “Oceania” communities of Abissa, Kula, Soku, Idama, Elem Sangama of Akuku Toru Local Government Area. But because of the economic value of the unlinked Communities to Nigeria, (they produce substantial oil and gas in the area), the Federal, State Governments and the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), can extend the road network to those areas just as Bonny is linked to Port Harcourt and the Lagos Mainland Bridge is connecting several towns in Lagos and neighbouring States.Kudos to previous administrations who had constructed the Central Group axis.

However, what is said to be the First Phase of the Trans-Kalabari Road project is actually a linkage of the “Central Group” Communities which consists of Krakrama, Angulama, Omekwe. Ama, Omekwe Tari Ama, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama. It is the peripheral of the Trans-Kalabari Road. The completion of the Main Trans Kalabari project will free Port Harcourt and Obio/Akpor areas from congestion. It will motivate residents and people of the three local areas to contribute to the development of their Communities. If the Ogonis, Etches, Emohuas, Oyigbos, Okrikas, Elemes can feel comfortable doing business in Port Harcourt from home, residents and people whose communities are linked to Port Harcourt through the Trans-Kalabari Road will no doubt, do likewise. The vast arable virgin land of the Bukuma people can be open for development and sustainable agricultural ventures by Local, State and Federal Government.

It is necessary to recall that the Bukuma community was host to the Federal Government’s Graduate Farmers’ Scheme and the Rivers State Government moribund School-to-Land Scheme under Governor Fidelis Oyakhilome. Bukuma was the only community in Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas that has the capacity to carry those agricultural programmes. However the lack of road to transport farm produce to Port Harcourt and facilitate the movement of the beneficiaries of the scheme who lived in the community which is several miles away from the farms, hampered the sustainability of the programme. The main Trans-Kalabari Road remains the best gift to the people of Degema, Asari Toru, and Akuku-Toru Local Government Areas. Kudos to Sir Siminilayi Fubara.

By: Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

That U.S. Capture of Maduro

Published

2 days ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction.”

The first part of this story was published in our last edition.

In Africa and the Middle East, regime change—whether by invasion, proxy warfare, or sanctions—has often left behind fractured states, weakened institutions, and prolonged instability. Washington’s motivations in Venezuela are widely understood: vast oil reserves, alliances with U.S. rivals, and symbolic defiance of American influence in the Western Hemisphere. But none of these reasons confer legal or moral legitimacy. Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction. If every powerful nation acted on its grievances in this manner, global chaos would inevitably follow. International law provides mechanisms for accountability. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), individuals accused of crimes against humanity or other grave offences are subject to investigation and prosecution through judicial processes.

Likewise, extradition treaties, mutual legal assistance agreements, and Interpol mechanisms exist to ensure accountability while respecting due process. These frameworks were designed precisely to prevent unilateral enforcement of “justice” by military force. The most profound consequence of America’s action may not be in Caracas, but in the precedent it sets. If the world accepts that a superpower can unilaterally depose another country’s president, then the foundation of the international system is weakened. Sovereignty becomes conditional—no longer a right, but a privilege tolerated at the discretion of the powerful. Going forward, if another country invades its neighbour, will the United States retain the moral authority to impose sanctions or demand restraint? Some analysts already warn that parallels between Russia’s actions in Ukraine and America’s conduct in Venezuela risk further eroding global norms. Selective adherence to international law breeds cynicism and accelerates the drift toward a world governed by force rather than rules.

Power—military, economic, or political—should serve human progress and collective well-being, not domination and destruction. For African nations, many of which emerged from colonial rule through bitter struggle, this precedent is especially alarming. Sovereignty is not an abstract legal concept; it is a hard-won shield against external domination. Any erosion of that principle anywhere weakens it everywhere. Africa’s painful history of foreign interference makes this lesson especially urgent. For me, the real issue is not whether Nicolás Maduro is a good or bad leader. That judgment belongs, first and foremost, to the Venezuelan people. The larger issue is whether the international system still operates on law—or has quietly reverted to hierarchy. If America insists it is defending global order, it must ask itself a difficult question: can an order survive when its most powerful guardian feels entitled to violate it? Until that question is answered honestly, the capture of a foreign president will remain not a triumph of justice, but a troubling symbol of a world drifting from law toward force.

If the United States felt so strongly about the allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking against Maduro, were there no other lawful options? Judicial accountability, diplomacy, regional mediation, and multilateral pressure may be slow and imperfect, but they reflect respect for international law and sovereign equality. Military seizure is a blunt instrument. It humiliates institutions, radicalizes populations, and hardens resistance. It may remove a leader, but it rarely resolves the underlying crisis. History teaches that military interventions seldom result in stable democratic outcomes. More often, they breed resentment, resistance, and long-term instability. For the sake of global order and the rule of law, the United States should reconsider this path and recommit to diplomacy, legal cooperation, and respect for the sovereign equality of states. Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly described the invasion of Venezuela as “unlawful and unwise,” warning that such actions “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.” Her words reflect a growing recognition, even within the United States, that force without legitimacy undermines both moral authority and global stability.

Should what happened in Venezuela serve as a wake-up call for corrupt African leaders who undermine the people’s right to choose their leaders? The answer is yes. The capture of Maduro should alarm African leaders who manipulate elections, weaken institutions, suppress opposition, undermine citizens’ rights, or cling to power at all costs. Venezuela faced widespread criticism over disputed elections and repression long before this episode, and that context shaped how the world reacted. This does not justify foreign military intervention, but it highlights an uncomfortable truth: prolonged democratic decay isolates nations and invites external pressure—from sanctions to diplomatic censure. Global opinion matters, and legitimacy at home strengthens sovereignty abroad. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and several African leaders have rightly condemned the events in Venezuela, invoking the principles of sovereignty and non-interference enshrined in international and regional law.

Beyond condemnation, however, African leaders must look inward. The continent’s future cannot be built on repression, constitutional manipulation, and personal greed. Leadership must reflect the will of the people, not desperation for power. Two days ago, a social commentator on a radio station argued that Trump’s action—though condemnable—demonstrates how far a leader can go for his country’s interest. According to this view, he did not intervene in Venezuela for personal enrichment, but to strengthen his nation. In stark contrast, many African leaders plunder their own countries. They siphon public resources, impose crushing taxes and harmful policies, and leave their citizens poorer—all for selfish gain. That contradiction is the deeper lesson Africa must confront.True sovereignty is protected not only by international law, but by accountable leadership at home.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Kudos Gov Fubara

Published

2 weeks ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area. This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.

The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people. He said, “our isolation is over.” That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.

The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.

Samuel Ebiye