Goodluck Jonathan Clarifies Comment on Buhari, Denies Linking Him to Boko Haram
Insurgency
Goodluck Jonathan Clarifies Comment on Buhari, Denies Linking Him to Boko Haram
Former Nigerian President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan has clarified his recent remarks about ex-President Muhammadu Buhari and the terrorist group Boko Haram, following a wave of media reports and public reactions that suggested he had accused Buhari of having ties with the insurgents.
Jonathan’s comments, made during the public presentation of Scars, a book authored by former Chief of Defence Staff Lucky Irabor, had stirred controversy after he recalled that Boko Haram once mentioned Buhari as a possible negotiator during peace talks. The statement was widely interpreted as linking Buhari, who later became president (2015–2023), to the extremist sect.
In a statement issued through his media aide, Ikechukwu Eze, Jonathan described the media reports as “misrepresentations”, stressing that at no time did he suggest Buhari had connections to Boko Haram.
According to Jonathan, Boko Haram had a history of “name-dropping” public figures to create confusion and legitimacy for their activities. He explained that citing Buhari as a potential negotiator before Buhari’s presidency was one of such tactics.
“The mention of Buhari’s name was not proof of association but rather an example of Boko Haram’s manipulative strategies,” Jonathan’s aide clarified.
He further noted that if Buhari had indeed been aligned with the group, the insurgency would have ended during his presidency. Instead, Jonathan emphasized, Buhari himself was targeted by Boko Haram attacks, proving he was never on their side.
The clarification comes after Garba Shehu, former presidential spokesperson under Buhari, strongly refuted Jonathan’s initial remarks, dismissing them as false and politically motivated. Shehu insisted that Buhari “stood firm against terrorism” and accused Jonathan of attempting to distort history.
Other political commentators suggest that the controversy reflects the sensitivity of Nigeria’s political climate as the country approaches the 2027 general elections, with both Jonathan and Buhari’s legacies remaining central to discussions about insecurity, governance, and leadership credibility.
The Boko Haram insurgency remains one of Nigeria’s gravest national security challenges, having caused tens of thousands of deaths and displacements across the North-East since 2009. Linking national leaders to the group even indirectly has serious implications for political trust, international reputation, and the collective fight against terrorism.
Jonathan’s swift clarification shows an effort to protect not just his image but also to avoid fueling divisive narratives in a country already battling insecurity and political mistrust.
While the controversy underscores how fragile Nigeria’s political discourse is, it also highlights the responsibility of public figures to weigh their words carefully. In a nation where misinformation spreads quickly, any statement on sensitive issues like terrorism can easily be weaponized by political opponents or misinterpreted by the media.
Both Jonathan and Buhari represent pivotal moments in Nigeria’s democratic journey, and dragging their names into fresh controversies risks distracting from the urgent task of building unity and defeating terrorism once and for all.
