By Jacob EDI
Governance, in its truest sense, is no tea party. It demands courage, clarity, and the moral stamina to make hard choices—even when those choices are unpopular. Since assuming office, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has come face to face with the full weight of that reality. The honeymoon of campaign promises is over, and what stares him in the face is the burden of governance — raw, unfiltered, and relentless.
Unarguably, Tinubu, inherited a nation on the edge ,fractured by insecurity, weakened by economic hemorrhage, bruised by years of inconsistent policy direction where corruption was almost a directive principle of state. But where others dithered, he has chosen to confront Nigeria’s demons head-on.
The abrupt removal of fuel subsidy and the floating of the naira were not populist moves at all but they were necessary, painful, and perhaps overdue… little wonder all the presidential candidates made these necessary policies a campaign promise. Yet, for many Nigerians, these policies have been the hardest pills to swallow.
There’s a peculiar loneliness that comes with leadership. Tinubu now bears that loneliness. In a country where sentiment often overshadows sense, where people want change but resist the cost of it, leading becomes a paradox. Nigerians want progress, but not pain. They want reforms, but without disruptions. Governance, however, does not bend to such emotional economics.
Still, one cannot ignore the irony that Tinubu, the political strategist who built alliances and empires in Lagos and beyond, now faces the toughest opponent yet—governance itself. Lagos was his experiment; Nigeria is his final test. The scale is different, the stakes higher, and the consequences more immediate. Every policy has ripple effects that touch millions, every delay widens the trust deficit, and every misstep becomes amplified in the national consciousness.
His decision to reshuffle the military hierarchy, for instance, came at a time when whispers of a coup had begun to float through the corridors of speculation.
With military dispatch, the military dismissed this rumour.
Still, Tinubu acted.
For all intents and purposes, the decision “to streghten the nation’s secuirty architecture” is a demonstartion that as important as loyalty may be to the state apparatus, it supersedes regional or political sentiment. The men in uniform must be inspired, equipped, and accountable. National security cannot afford complacency.
He understood that leadership isn’t about waiting for crisis to mature before taking action. Unlike his immediate predecessor, who often hesitated in moments of national insecurity, Tinubu demonstrated the presence of mind that defines statesmanship. In a season of political unease, he chose decisiveness over dithering.
For a nation built on a very fragile federal equilibrium, rejigging the nation’s security architecture could spark delicate and dangerous insinuations that might reignite old suspicions that national cohesion is giving way to sectional dominance. But it is instructive that, on matters of security, emotional analysis takes a back seat when the safety of the nation is at stake. And for those who glory in conspiracy theorization to suggest that Mr. President acted in panic, would they rather nothing was done? The consequence of inaction would not just be grievous but incalculable.
This is not to romanticize Tinubu’s leadership. Governance is not judged by intent alone but by impact. The question remains: are Nigerians safer, more hopeful, and better off than they were a year ago? The answer is complicated. Inflation bites, the naira flounders, and insecurity still stalks communities from the North to the South. The hardship is real and deepening. Truth is, nations are not rebuilt in comfort. The first stage of reform is always chaos before order. Tinubu’s Nigeria is still in that inchoate phase, where pain precedes progress and where every gain comes with resistance.
Those who compare him to past presidents often miss the point. Tinubu’s burden is heavier because the rot runs deeper. Buhari’s administration, while cloaked in anti-corruption rhetoric, left behind a hollowed-out economy, a fractured security architecture, and an exhausted citizenry. Jonathan, for all his calm demeanor, lacked the will to confront Nigeria’s entrenched dysfunction. The Otueke born politician procrastinated till the end. Tinubu, however, appears determined to face these challenges by reengineering the system, even if it means burning political capital rather than deploy the use of rhetorics.
The burden of governance is not just about fixing problems; it’s about restoring faith. Nigerians have been lied to, disappointed, and left hanging by leaders who promised reform but delivered excuses.. remember the rice pyramid arrangement ? This is in our recent history. Tinubu’s challenge, is psychological and this beyond policy. He must convince a weary nation that this time, the pain is worth it. That this time, the sacrifice will yield fruit. That this time, the government is not bluffing. Whether there was attempted coup or not, Baba is not joking.
It is commendable that Tinubu recognizes that leadership requires more than political dexterity, it demands the presence of mind to act decisively when the nation’s pulse weakens. But presence of mind must evolve into presence of results. Nigerians are impatient, and rightfully so. They have been promised greatness for too long and delivered mediocrity instead.
In the end, Tinubu’s burden is not unique. Every leader, at some point, confronts the limits of their myth. The power that once seemed all-conquering becomes a daily struggle to survive the expectations it created. That is the nadir of power… when the cheers fade and all that’s left is responsibility.
As echoes of another presidential election gets louder, President Tinubu and his team must make a clear choice: either rise to the moment and etch his name in the annals of statesmanship, or succumb to the weight of Nigeria’s perpetual contradictions. The burden of governance is heavy, but it is also the only path to redemption for both leader and nation.
As Nigerians endure the turbulence of reform, one thing remains clear: the days ahead will test not just Tinubu’s capacity to govern, but his courage to stay true to his convictions. For a man who has waited decades for this moment, the real question now is whether he can bear the burden he so passionately sought.
The cheers fade.
The applause becomes muted.
And suddenly, every decision is questioned.
Herein lies the burden of leadership.
* EDI is a Public Affairs Analyst
