By Kunle Oyatomi
The political “game” of the 2011 presidency is becoming fascinating. As people voice their support for or opposition to the candidates on offer, the plot to win thickens, making it even more difficult for observers to attempt a prediction.
Increasingly, it is looking like a chessboard with two “masters” at the opposite ends. You can’t put a bet on the chances of either to win at this stage, especially so because the “factors” that should determine the victor are themselves too unstable to depend on, for a judgment or a prediction.

Of all those, (the “factors”), who have come out to take a stand, only the South South is categorical for Jonathan. The East, while declaring categorically on their not fielding a candidate for the presidential election, was silent on where its sympathy lies. The safe presumption here is that the choice is being left open to the individual, at least for now.

The position of the north is patently ambivalent. Whereas its governors acknowledged the constitutional right of the incumbent president to contest in 2011, ten (10) out of 19 of them voted in support of zoning (which technically knocks Jonathan out of the race), while seven of them decided against zoning. Two of the governors thought the situation is too fluid to offer an opinion as yet.

With this contradictory positions, the north is practically putting on hold a decision for or against Jonathan; A stance typical of the political chessmasters that the northern political elites have become on the Nigerian scene.

However, the Wester with as many “national” leaders as there are states in the region sounds, rowdy with a cacophony of voices in opposite directions of the presidential chessboard. In this region, positions have been taken for and against the front runners because the leadership is so hopelessly polarised, it would be a miracle to unite them on any issue.

It is the reason an Akala would disagree with his deputy on Babangida’s visiting Ibadan to canvass for support, while a Fashola would not think the same way as an Oyinlola on the issue of who should become the next president in 2011. “Good” for civilised politics, you think?; I very much doubt that. I think there simply is a problem getting these Western leaders to agree on anything.

So, the game of chess is looking stalemated. However, if you look deeper, it is a good deal more than just a game. The incumbent is an unusual player in this game. He possesses enormous powers and wherewithal to turn the table in his favour; and a big stick in addition to galvanise support for victory.

But he needs two people desperately on his side to secure the needed advatage. First he needs the chairman of the party to survive, just as much as the chairman needs him to succeed. So there is a mutual interest here, and it will serve both interests for them to be friendly.

But there is yet a bigger “factor”, the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the PDP.  He is the master schemer who has shown all of us what he is capable of from the fiasco of 2007 which is still resonating till this moment. There is no question that his sympathies are with Jonathan, and that could be crucial for the outcome of the game.

On the other end of the game is IBB who is as good a chess master as any one else on the political turf today.
You cannot discount his schemings from the outcome of the Eastern and Northern governors’ meetings, which did not explicitly throw their weight behind Jonathan. Although IBB would need the party chairman to win, the latter doesn’t need him to succeed, which is a minus of sort. However, by the inconclusiveness of solid (united) support from East, West and North for a Jonathan presidency, IBB is put firmly on the cards.

The jockeying for political power in Nigeria is at its mos delicate and dangerous state.

Thus far, Jonathan’s solid support is from the South South. The West and East may, for geopolitical reasons, prefer the incumbent president as well, but there also are induced sympathies here for IBB which the old maradona knows how to exploit and is doing so very effectively, even if it might fall just short of the required numbers to win.

But there is a problem from the north. If it manages to stay “Solid” (which is increasingly becoming doubtful), it could upturn the stakes in favour of the side it supports. for as long as these jockeyings are done democratically, we have nothing o worry over. But if the “do or die” element is introduced, there will be a lot to be worried over or even afraid of.

So far, however, the game is reasonably fair even if unusually roburst. And, as I mentioned last week, there are no alternatives yet to assess, so we keep with the front runners; and my assessment at this juncture is that support for either “Aspirants” on the ground is diffused.

We can only wait to see how this translates at the primaries that is, if IBB remains with PDP till the end. I expect nothing less than a battle royale.