Connect with us

Opinion

Restoring the Glory That Was Always There: Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf and the Historical Vision Behind Kano First

Published

4 months ago

on

 

 

By Saminu Umar Ph.D | Senior Lecturer, Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano

Advert

Kano does not need to be invented. That is a truth so fundamental, so historically self-evident, that it should not need to be stated at all, and yet the circumstances of recent decades have made its restatement not merely appropriate but urgent. There is a tendency, in the discourse of Nigerian development, to treat every governance initiative as a beginning, as though the society being governed had no prior history of achievement, no accumulated wisdom, no tested traditions of institutional excellence on which new efforts might be built. This tendency is not merely intellectually lazy, but it is, in the specific context of Kano, a form of historical injustice, a failure to reckon honestly with the civilizational inheritance that this state carries and that its people have never entirely abandoned, even through the long and painful decades in which their institutions were hollowed out, their values eroded, and their confidence systematically undermined by the combined weight of misgovernance, corruption, and the slow cultural dislocation that follows when a society loses trust in the institutions that are supposed to embody its highest aspirations.
Kano was, long before Nigeria existed as a political entity, one of the most sophisticated and enduring centers of civilization in West Africa. Its greatness was not the greatness of conquest or of externally imposed order. It was the greatness of organic development, of a society that built, over centuries, a coherent and self-sustaining civilization on foundations that were simultaneously material and moral. The trans-Saharan trade networks that made Kano a commercial hub of continental significance were sustained not merely by geography or by the availability of goods, but by a culture of commercial integrity, of trust between trading partners, of contractual reliability, and of the kind of reputational accountability that makes markets function across distances and between strangers. The Islamic scholarship that gave Kano its intellectual authority was not merely a religious tradition. It was a governance philosophy, one that placed knowledge, justice, accountability, and the subordination of personal interest to public duty at the center of what it meant to hold power. The traditional political institutions that maintained Kano’s social order were not instruments of oppression but, at their best, mechanisms of consultation, legitimacy, and the managed resolution of social conflict.
These were not accidental achievements. They were the products of deliberate cultivation, of generations of Kano’s people choosing, consciously and consistently, to organize their collective life around values that made both individual flourishing and communal solidarity possible. That is what a civilization is: not a collection of buildings or a record of territorial expansion, but a living tradition of values, practices, and institutions that enables a human community to achieve, across time, more than any individual generation could accomplish alone. Kano built such a civilization. And the question that every serious governor of Kano must eventually confront, whether they frame it in these terms or not, is whether they are adding to that civilization or subtracting from it.
It is against this civilizational backdrop that the Kano First Initiative under Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf must be understood, not as a new idea imported into Kano from outside, not as a political slogan invented to win elections and abandoned when the votes are counted, but as a deliberate act of historical retrieval, an attempt to reach back through the debris of recent decades and recover the foundations on which Kano’s genuine greatness was built. The initiative’s framework document states this explicitly and without embarrassment: Kano’s most persistent challenges are not solely infrastructural or economic in nature. They are fundamentally behavioral, normative, and narrative failures, accumulated over time and reinforced by weak value transmission, fragmented authority, and uncoordinated messaging. This is a diagnosis of remarkable historical honesty, and it is one that only a governor with a genuine understanding of what Kano has been and what it has lost could have authorized.
Governor Yusuf’s historical vision is not nostalgic in the sentimental sense of the word. He is not proposing a return to a romanticized past that never existed in the uncomplicated form that nostalgia requires. He is proposing something simultaneously more modest and more ambitious: the recovery of specific values, specific institutional principles, and specific civic traditions that demonstrably worked, that demonstrably sustained Kano’s coherence and productivity over centuries, and that demonstrably began to break down when they were displaced by the governing logic of extraction, patronage, and the systematic subordination of public interest to private accumulation. Islamic ethical governance, communal responsibility, the dignity of productive labor, respect for legitimate authority, the centrality of knowledge in public life, these are not abstract ideals. They are the operational principles of a civilization that actually functioned, and their recovery is not a romantic aspiration but a practical governance imperative.
The intellectual architecture through which this recovery is being pursued bears the clear fingerprints of the Honourable Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya, whose contribution to the Kano First Initiative has been, in every meaningful sense, the contribution of a man who understands both what Kano is and what it needs. The framework he has championed integrates three traditions that, taken together, give the initiative both its cultural legitimacy and its analytical credibility: the Islamic ethical governance tradition that historically underpinned Kano’s stability and justice, Kano’s own sociocultural heritage of communal solidarity and institutional accountability, and the modern behavioral change communication science that provides the methodological tools for translating values into measurable social outcomes. This integration is not accidental. It reflects a deep conviction, shared by both the governor and his commissioner, that genuine renewal cannot be achieved by importing foreign solutions but only by excavating and rebuilding on Kano’s own foundations.
The scale of what has been lost must be honestly acknowledged if the scale of what is being attempted is to be properly appreciated. Kano today carries wounds that decades of misgovernance have inflicted on its social fabric with a thoroughness that cannot be undone quickly or easily. Youth disaffection has reached levels that express themselves in drug abuse, street violence, and the nihilistic political thuggery that represents, at its core, the rage of young people who were promised a future and received instead a void. Institutional trust, once the bedrock of Kano’s civic life, has been so systematically eroded that the default posture of many citizens toward their government is not engagement but cynicism, not participation but withdrawal. The digital media ecosystem, which should be a tool of civic enlightenment, has in too many instances become a vehicle for the amplification of the very misinformation, polarization, and moral dislocation that the Kano First Initiative is designed to address. These are not small problems, and they will not yield to small solutions.
What gives the Kano First Initiative its historical seriousness is precisely that it does not pretend otherwise. The four-phase implementation framework, stretching from 2026 through 2030, is built on the recognition that the restoration of a civilization’s normative foundations is a generational project, not a political campaign. Phase One builds the empirical foundation, the baseline surveys, perception mapping, and narrative architecture that genuine social intervention requires. Phase Two deploys coordinated, multi-channel behavioral activation across youth networks, religious institutions, traditional authorities, and community organizations. Phase Three scales what works and deepens digital engagement. Phase Four embeds the initiative permanently into Kano’s governance architecture through a dedicated directorate and the annual Kano Values Index. This is not the timeline of an administration managing its image. It is the timeline of a government that has looked honestly at the depth of the challenge and committed itself to the depth of response that the challenge demands.
There is an emotional dimension to this story that deserves to be named directly, because it is one that the purely analytical framing of policy discourse tends to obscure. Kano’s people love their state with an intensity and a pride that is, even in a country of fierce regional loyalties, remarkable. They carry within them the memory of a greatness that their grandparents knew and that they themselves have glimpsed, in fragments and in moments, even through the long decades of disappointment. When Governor Yusuf speaks of restoring Kano’s glory, he is not merely making a political argument. He is speaking to something that lives in the hearts of ordinary Kano citizens, something that has survived misgovernance, political manipulation, and cultural erosion with a resilience that is itself a testament to the depth of Kano’s civilizational roots. That emotional resonance is not a weakness in the Kano First philosophy. It is one of its greatest strategic assets, because renewal that connects with people’s deepest sense of identity and pride generates the kind of civic energy that no top-down programme can manufacture.
The work of restoring that glory belongs, ultimately, not to government alone but to every institution, every community leader, every journalist, every religious scholar, every teacher, every trader, and every young person in Kano who chooses, in their daily conduct, to live by the values that made this civilization great. Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has provided the vision, the institutional framework, and the personal example of a leader who is willing to pay the political costs that genuine commitment to the public good always exacts. Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya has provided the intellectual architecture and the communication infrastructure through which that vision can be translated into civic reality. The rest, as it must always be when a society is serious about its own renewal, belongs to the people.
Kano’s glory was never lost. It was covered over, layer by layer, by the accumulated debris of decades of bad governance, institutional betrayal, and the slow erosion of the values that once made it shine. The Kano First Initiative is not building something new on empty ground. It is clearing the ground of debris so that what was always there can breathe again, grow again, and reclaim the space in Nigeria’s national life and in West Africa’s historical memory that Kano has always, by right of civilization, deserved to occupy. That is the historical vision behind Kano First. And it is a vision worth every effort, every sacrifice, and every ounce of collective will that Kano’s people can bring to its realization.

 

Saminu Umar Ph.D is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano. surijyarzaki@gmail.com

Related Topics:

Opinion

Kashim Shettima and the Question of Continuity in 2027

Published

7 hours ago

on

July 18, 2026

By

Kashim S

By Baba Dantiye, MON, mni, FNGE

As Nigeria gradually approaches another election cycle, political discussions are naturally beginning to focus on the choices that will shape the 2027 general elections. Among the issues attracting attention is the question of presidential tickets and, particularly, the role of Vice President Kashim Shettima within the current administration.

The choice of a running mate is one of the most significant decisions in any presidential contest. It involves considerations that go beyond electoral calculations. Factors such as competence, experience, political balance, governance record, public perception and the ability to complement the President’s vision all play important roles.

Against this background, the performance, public service record and leadership contributions of Vice President Kashim Shettima have become central to discussions about continuity and the future direction of the Tinubu administration.

Since assuming office in May 2023, Shettima has occupied an important position within the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. As Vice President, his responsibilities have included representing the President at official engagements, chairing strategic meetings, coordinating government initiatives and engaging with national and international stakeholders.

One of the notable features of the Tinubu-Shettima partnership has been the public display of cooperation between the President and his deputy. Nigeria’s political history has witnessed instances where relationships between presidents and vice presidents became strained, creating distractions that affected governance. The relatively smooth working relationship between the two leaders has been viewed by observers as an important factor in maintaining stability within the administration.

Shettima has consistently presented himself as a supportive deputy, focusing on responsibilities assigned to him and contributing to the implementation and communication of government policies.

In political leadership, loyalty is often considered alongside competence and capacity. A Vice President is expected not only to support the President but also to bring experience, judgment and independent value to governance. Supporters of Shettima point to his ability to maintain this balance by remaining committed to the administration while drawing from his extensive background in public service.

His leadership of the National Economic Council (NEC) is one of the key areas in which his role has attracted attention. The Council provides a platform for collaboration between the Federal Government and state governments on issues affecting economic development, infrastructure, agriculture, energy and other national priorities.

Chairing such a body requires political maturity, patience and the ability to manage diverse interests. Nigeria’s governors represent different political parties, regions and perspectives. Effective coordination therefore depends on consultation, dialogue and consensus-building.

As a former Governor of Borno State, Shettima brings practical experience of state administration and an understanding of the challenges faced by sub-national governments. This background has been useful in facilitating discussions between the Federal Government and State leaders on issues requiring collective action.

The Vice President has also been involved in government efforts relating to economic coordination, food security and other national development priorities. While the long-term impact of many policies will continue to be assessed, his role demonstrates the importance of coordination and collaboration in a complex federal system.

Advert

Another area frequently discussed is his role in communicating government policies. The current administration has introduced significant economic reforms that have generated extensive public debate. In such circumstances, communication and public engagement become important elements of governance.

Shettima has consistently used public platforms to explain government positions, engage stakeholders and present the administration’s perspective on national issues. His approach has generally emphasised patience, understanding and the long-term objectives of government programmes.

Beyond his current office, Shettima’s experience as Governor of Borno State remains an important part of his public record. He governed during one of the most challenging periods in Nigeria’s recent history, when the Boko Haram insurgency created serious security and humanitarian difficulties.

Leading Borno State during that period required resilience, crisis management skills and the ability to work with security agencies, traditional institutions, humanitarian organisations and development partners. His administration operated under extraordinary circumstances while attempting to sustain government services and support affected communities.

That experience contributed to his understanding of security management, humanitarian challenges and the relationship between peace, stability and development.

His political journey also reflects experience across different levels of governance. Before becoming Vice President, he served in the Senate, where he participated in national legislative processes and gained further exposure to federal governance. His experience as a former governor, legislator and Vice President has shaped his understanding of Nigeria’s political and administrative environment.

Observers have also highlighted his relationship with his successor in Borno State as an example of political transition without public disagreement. In Nigeria’s political environment, where transitions between elected officials can sometimes lead to conflicts, peaceful succession and institutional continuity are often regarded as positive developments.

The Vice President’s relationship with Northern stakeholders has also formed part of discussions around his political relevance. Through engagements with traditional institutions, business communities, professional groups and other stakeholders, he has remained one of the administration’s prominent voices in explaining government policies and national priorities.

The North remains an important component of Nigeria’s political landscape, and leaders from the region have historically played significant roles in national affairs. Shettima’s experience and political network have contributed to his visibility in national conversations.

However, the question of a presidential ticket involves broader considerations beyond the performance of an individual office holder. Political parties must consider issues such as national spread, electoral strategy, changing alliances, public sentiment and the overall objectives of the party.

Different perspectives will naturally emerge as Nigeria moves closer to 2027. Some may emphasise continuity and the value of retaining an established partnership, while others may advocate different approaches based on evolving political circumstances. Such debates are part of the democratic process.

Ultimately, the decision on the composition of the presidential ticket will rest with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the leadership of the All Progressives Congress. Their decision will reflect political consultations, strategic considerations and their assessment of what best serves their objectives and the country.

Nevertheless, public discussion remains important because democracy is strengthened when citizens assess leaders based on performance, responsibility and contributions to national development.

A successful administration depends not only on policies but also on teamwork among those entrusted with implementing them. Stability, trust and institutional experience are valuable assets in governance, particularly in a country as complex and diverse as Nigeria.

Whether continuity is ultimately preferred or a different path is chosen, the debate underscores an enduring principle: democratic leadership is strengthened when decisions are informed by performance, experience, constitutional responsibility and the public interest. As Nigeria looks ahead to 2027, the experience, service and contributions of Kashim Shettima will remain central to any serious assessment of the choices before the nation.

About the Writer

Baba Dantiye, MON, mni, FNGE, is a former Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Kano State and former President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (2003–2008)

Continue Reading

Opinion

History Matters:Development Should Not Be Rebranded-Tijjani Sarki

Published

2 days ago

on

July 16, 2026

By

Kano Map

 

 

Tijjani Sarki

I have always believed that governments should be applauded for genuine achievements. But I am equally convinced that no administration earns public trust by taking credit for projects it did not initiate.

The historical record on the Kano Northern Bypass and the Bagwai (Watari) Irrigation Scheme is clear. The Northern Bypass was initiated in 2007 under President Olusegun Obasanjo, while the Bagwai Irrigation Scheme has existed for decades as part of the Kano River irrigation programme. If the Tinubu administration has accelerated work on the bypass, it deserves commendation. However, advancing an inherited project is not the same as conceiving it.

I was particularly amazed by a recent post from a political aide to the President, which portrayed the Kano Northern Bypass and the Bagwai Irrigation Scheme as achievements of the Tinubu administration without clearly distinguishing between inherited projects and the administration’s specific interventions. My brother, what the people of Kano expect from you is not the rebranding of long-standing projects, but your influence in attracting new, tangible federal projects to our state. That, more than anything else, would be a legacy worthy of recognition.

Advert

I am often skeptical whenever political communication attempts to replace facts with convenient narratives. Governments earn greater credibility when they acknowledge the foundations laid by their predecessors while demonstrating the value they have added.

To be fair, the Renewed Hope Housing Programme deserves recognition. However, many working Nigerians and low-income families, the overwhelming majority of our population, still question whether such houses are genuinely within their reach.

As a Kano indigene, my greater concern is not who claims inherited projects but what our numerous presidential appointees are attracting to the state. Kano is proud of their appointments, yet their developmental footprint remains far less visible than many expected.

Rather than engaging in avoidable historical revision, I expect our presidential appointees, individually or collectively, to leverage their positions to attract fresh federal investments in irrigation, water resources, healthcare, education, roads, power, agriculture, and industrial development. Kano needs new projects that address its pressing developmental challenges, not borrowed glory wrapped in political narratives.

History remembers those who create lasting legacies, not those who merely claim inherited ones.

Tijjani Sarki
Good Governance Advocate and Public Policy Analyst
From the Ancient City of Kano
17th July,2026

Continue Reading

Opinion

Christian Genocide Debate in Nigeria: Examining the Facts, Statistics, and Different Perspectives.

Published

2 days ago

on

July 16, 2026

By

 

By Ayoola Esther Ifeoluwa

Introduction

Few security issues in Nigeria generate as much debate as claims that Christians are facing genocide. International politicians, religious organizations, journalists, and scholars have expressed different opinions. Understanding this issue requires examining the available statistics alongside the broader context of Nigeria’s security challenges.

Arguments Supporting the Genocide Claim

The Sun Nigeria reports that several Christian organizations argue that many attacks deliberately target Christian villages, churches, and clergy. They point to repeated attacks in Benue, Plateau, Kaduna, and Borno, where churches have been destroyed and worshippers killed. Some advocacy groups estimate that tens of thousands of Christians have died since 2009 and describe the violence as systematic persecution.

Arguments Against the Genocide Label

Other researchers disagree with using the term genocide. Data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) indicate that although Christians have suffered serious attacks, Muslims have also been victims of terrorism, banditry, and communal violence. Many experts therefore describe Nigeria’s insecurity as a combination of terrorism, farmer-herder conflict, organized crime, weak governance, and competition over natural resources rather than a coordinated campaign to eliminate Christians nationwide.

Advert

Key Statistics

According to ACLED, more than 20,400 civilians were killed in nearly 12,000 attacks across Nigeria between January 2020 and September 2025.

According to ThisDay, various organisations have reported that many Christians have been killed or kidnapped in recent years, although exact figures remain disputed.

Recent Reuters reports indicate that violence has continued in Benue and Plateau States, resulting in repeated loss of lives, displacement, and destruction of property. In Plateau State, attacks in communities such as Bokkos, Barkin Ladi, Mangu, Jos North, and surrounding areas have claimed many lives. In Benue State, attacks have also been reported in Katsina-Ala, Kwande, Agatu, and Otukpo, while security agencies have intensified patrols following the killing of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) State Chairman. These incidents highlight the continuing humanitarian and security challenges facing both states.

A Balanced View

Evidence suggests that some attacks have clear religious dimensions, particularly those carried out by extremist groups such as Boko Haram and ISWAP. In other cases, especially farmer-herder conflicts, religious identity overlaps with ethnic and economic disputes, making it difficult to attribute every incident solely to religion.

Overall, the available evidence suggests that Christians have experienced serious persecution and violence in several regions of Nigeria. However, legal experts remain divided on whether the situation satisfies the international legal definition of genocide.

Conclusion

The debate over Christian genocide in Nigeria is unlikely to end soon because of the different interpretations of the evidence. What is beyond dispute is that thousands of Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims, have lost their lives due to insecurity. The priority should be to strengthen security, prosecute perpetrators, support victims, and address the root causes of violence, including poverty, weak institutions, environmental pressures, and political failures.

Sources
Reuters
ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project)
ThisDay
The Sun Nigeria

By Ayoola Esther Ifeoluwa
200 Level Student
Department of Development and Strategic Communication
University of Abuja.

Continue Reading

Trending