https://www.facebook.com/257519104121310/

Guage Media Concept, Akure (2026)

01/08/2026

WIKE’S RECORD OF DELIVERY MAKES HIM THE RIGHT MAN TO FIX NIGERIA’S POWER SECTOR

By Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D

Leadership is ultimately measured not by promises but by visible results. In Nigeria’s democratic experience, few public office holders have commanded as much attention for infrastructure delivery as the Honourable Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Ezenwo Wike, Esq., CON. From his tenure as Chairman of Obio/Akpor Local Government Area, through eight years as Governor of Rivers State, to his current assignment in the FCT, his public service has been defined by bold projects, decisive administration and the rapid translation of policy into tangible outcomes.

As Executive Chairman of Obio/Akpor between 1999 and 2007, Wike earned a reputation for grassroots development. His administration prioritised road construction, the upgrading of primary schools and health centres, sanitation programmes, and the strengthening of local government institutions. His performance saw him elected President of the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON) and later to represent Africa in the Commonwealth Local Government Forum.

As Governor of Rivers State from 2015 to 2023, he presided over one of the most ambitious infrastructure programmes in the state’s history. Hundreds of kilometres of roads, dual carriageways, bridges and flyovers were delivered, transforming mobility in Port Harcourt and beyond. Urban renewal projects modernised several cities. There was substantial investment in education through the construction and renovation of primary and secondary schools, the establishment of model schools, and the rehabilitation of tertiary institutions. In health, hospitals and primary healthcare centres were built or upgraded. The judiciary was also strengthened with new court complexes, official residences and improved institutional support. Investments in security, sports, rural infrastructure, markets and water supply further defined the period. Observers at the time described Rivers State as one of Nigeria’s largest construction sites because of the scale and pace of delivery.

Since 2023, as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Wike has brought that same energy to Abuja. His focus has been on infrastructure renewal across the city centre and the Area Councils. Major roads have been constructed and rehabilitated, the Abuja Rail Mass Transit system has been revived, and efforts to restore the Abuja Master Plan have been intensified. Security initiatives have been strengthened, revenue generation has improved, and long-abandoned projects have been reopened.

What has particularly distinguished his FCT stewardship is the institutionalisation of annual commissioning. For the third year running, the FCT Administration has embarked on an intensive period of project inaugurations to mark the President’s anniversary in office. This year’s exercise, which runs for 31 days of continuous commissioning, is unprecedented in the history of the Territory. From road expansions to school and health facility upgrades, and from water projects to ICT infrastructure, the month-long programme is designed to take development directly to residents across Abuja and the satellite towns.

Equally worthy of mention is the recently commissioned, redesigned City Gate and the major entrance corridor through the airport. The new design is intended to give Abuja a befitting gateway that reflects the status of the nation’s capital, while also easing traffic and improving aesthetics for millions of visitors arriving by air. It is the sort of signature project that speaks to vision and to the conviction that public infrastructure must inspire confidence.

It is against this background that I respectfully submit that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu should give serious consideration to deploying Nyesom Wike, Esq., to the power sector in a possible second term. Nigeria’s greatest constraint to industrialisation, job creation, healthcare delivery and national productivity remains electricity. Despite years of reforms and the present policy of deregulation, millions of Nigerians and businesses still contend with unreliable supply.

Under the current deregulated framework, what the power sector requires is not less government, but better, more disciplined government to coordinate, regulate and deliver. The sector no longer needs only technical expertise. It needs a leader who demands accountability from contractors, insists on deadlines, confronts bureaucratic bottlenecks, and enforces implementation across GENCOs, DISCOs, TCN and regulators.

Those are the qualities Wike has demonstrated at the local government level, in Rivers State, and now in the FCT. The electricity value chain, from generation to transmission and distribution, requires exactly that kind of firm, results-driven leadership to dismantle inefficiencies, enforce contractual obligations, and ensure public funds yield measurable outcomes.

Mr. President, your administration has affirmed its commitment to infrastructure, economic growth and improved living standards. All of these rest on reliable electricity. As you reflect on the future composition of government, I urge you to consider assigning Nyesom Wike, Esq., to oversee the power sector. Nigeria deserves uninterrupted power. Our industries deserve stable energy. Our young people deserve an economy powered by the national grid rather than generators.

History remembers leaders not only for the offices they held, but for the difficult national problems they solved. With the right mandate and institutional support, many Nigerians believe Wike has the drive, administrative discipline and ex*****on capacity to help write a new chapter in Nigeria’s electricity story.

The time to think boldly is now.

Oluwole Terebo writes from Akure, Ondo State.

08/02/2026

Racist Vituperation and the Erosion of Political Decorum

President Donald Trump recently drew strong condemnation after sharing a video that portrayed former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as apes. The imagery, long associated with racist abuse against Black people, was widely seen as deeply offensive and dehumanising. Although, the video was later deleted, the act of sharing it, even briefly, sparked outrage because it echoed some of the most crude and historically painful forms of racial insult.

President Trump’s refusal to offer a clear apology further intensified public anger and concern. Across the United States, the reaction was swift and unusually broad. Civil rights groups, media organisations, and political leaders from both major parties described the video as racist and unacceptable. Many observers noted that such language and imagery undermine the dignity of public discourse and inflame racial tensions in an already polarised society. The incident revived painful memories of how racist stereotypes have been used in the past to demean Black leaders and communities, raising fears about the normalisation of hate in political communication.

Globally, the episode attracted negative attention and concern. International media outlets framed the incident as damaging to America’s moral standing and leadership image, especially on issues of race and human rights. From a global perspective, depicting a former Black President as an ape was seen not merely as a personal insult, but as a symbol of deeper racial intolerance. The backlash reflects a shared international expectation that political leaders, particularly those with global influence, should uphold basic standards of respect, restraint, and human dignity in public life.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

30/01/2026

The Bitter Fate of Nigeria's Retired Civil Servants

Nigeria’s retired civil servants face a painful reality that sharply contrasts with what their counterparts enjoy in many Western countries. In places like the United States and the United Kingdom, retirees often live with dignity after decades of service. They receive reliable pensions that are a large part of their final salary, along with healthcare support and other social benefits. These payments are regular and adjusted for inflation, helping retirees cope with rising living costs and maintain basic comfort.

In Nigeria, the story is very different. Many retired civil servants who served faithfully through difficult economic times now live in poverty. Their pensions are small, far below the cost of living, and payments are often delayed for months or even years. This situation goes beyond money. It reflects a deep failure of the system and a breach of trust, leaving those who served the nation abandoned in old age.

There are many tragic examples. A retired teacher from Oyo State, after nearly four decades of service, reportedly died poor and homeless because his pension was unpaid for years. He survived on charity and sold family property just to eat. In another case, a retired federal health worker from Kano could not afford medication for a chronic illness and died while waiting for her pension entitlements. These stories are not isolated. Across the country, retirees gather regularly to protest unpaid pensions. Some collapse during these protests, and some never return home alive.

Several factors drive this crisis. Corruption has drained pension funds through fraud and mismanagement. Poor economic planning has meant that national resources are spent on short-term political interests instead of long-term welfare for retirees. Weak institutions allow government bodies to delay or ignore pension obligations, forcing elderly retirees to endure repeated verification exercises with no clear end. This has damaged public trust and discouraged commitment to public service.

Nigeria urgently needs to change course. Pension funds must be fully and transparently funded, with systems that ensure payments are made on time and without manipulation. Pension amounts should reflect inflation so that retirees are not pushed deeper into poverty as prices rise. Access to healthcare must be guaranteed for retirees, especially for chronic conditions common in old age. Strong laws should be enforced to punish those who steal pension funds and to recover stolen assets.

How a nation treats its retirees says a lot about its values. Nigeria’s retired civil servants built the institutions that still hold the country together today. They deserve security, respect, and care in their later years, not hardship and neglect. Fixing the pension system is not just an economic issue; it is a moral duty.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

25/01/2026

From Threat to Trust

Nigeria’s security relationship with the United States became strained after rising concerns about Islamist terrorism, religious violence, and the safety of Christian communities. These concerns led the United States to tag Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern under its religious freedom laws. The move was meant to pressure Nigeria to do more to protect citizens and control violent groups, but it also created tension and mistrust between both countries.

During the early period of President Donald Trump’s administration, the U.S. took a tough stance. There were strong public warnings, talk of travel restrictions, and threats of acting alone against terrorist groups in Nigeria. At that time, Nigeria was battling Boko Haram and other armed groups, while violence linked to banditry, kidnappings, and communal clashes was spreading. The U.S. position was seen in Nigeria as heavy-handed and damaging to a long-standing partnership.

Over time, this hard approach began to change. Nigeria engaged more with U.S. officials, adjusted some security responses, and pushed for better coordination with international partners. The U.S., in turn, shifted from pressure to practical cooperation, choosing to support Nigeria rather than act without it.

This new approach became clearer under a revised U.S. security strategy that favours targeted counter-terrorism in Africa without long-term troop deployment. In December 2025, the U.S. carried out airstrikes against ISIS-linked fighters in northwest Nigeria in coordination with Nigerian forces. The action signaled trust and a shared commitment to tackling terrorism and protecting vulnerable communities.

Since then, cooperation has expanded. The U.S. has increased surveillance support, shared intelligence, supplied military equipment through AFRICOM, and helped set up a Joint Working Group with Nigeria in January, 2026. These steps show a move away from threats and public pressure toward quiet collaboration and mutual respect.

While this understanding has grown, Nigeria continues to face deep security challenges at home. In November 2025, the Federal Government declared a nationwide security emergency due to widespread kidnappings and violence. Police recruitment was increased, and states have spent large sums on security, with more planned for 2026.

Insecurity remains driven by election tensions, regional conflicts, militancy, separatist agitation, and banditry across different parts of the country. The relationship between Nigeria and the United States has evolved from suspicion and pressure to cooperation and trust. Joint actions and shared intelligence have improved Nigeria’s capacity to confront common threats. However, lasting progress will depend on fixing internal weaknesses, strengthening local security structures, and ensuring that security efforts unite rather than divide communities.

The United States has continued high-level diplomatic engagement with Nigeria through regular meetings with the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu. These meetings focus on counter-terrorism, intelligence sharing, protection of civilians, and strengthening Nigeria’s internal security framework. U.S. officials have praised Ribadu’s reform-driven approach and his efforts to improve coordination among security agencies. The discussions reflect growing trust between both countries and a shared commitment to tackling terrorism, banditry, and other transnational security threats through cooperation rather than confrontation.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

24/01/2026

Between Delivery and Disruption: The Nyesom Wike Question

Nyesom Wike remains one of the most controversial figures in Nigeria’s political space. His appointment as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has generated strong reactions, with critics pointing to governance concerns in Abuja and ongoing political tensions in Rivers State, while supporters highlight his electoral value and visible achievements. A fair assessment requires weighing both his contributions and the challenges surrounding his conduct.

Wike played a significant role in the 2023 presidential election that brought President Bola Tinubu to power. As the then Governor of Rivers State and a leading figure in the opposition PDP, he crossed party lines to support President Tinubu. This move helped the APC make notable gains in Rivers State, an oil-rich region traditionally controlled by the PDP, and strengthened APC support across parts of the Niger Delta. He also campaigned actively across the country, using his political influence to sway undecided voters. These efforts were reflected in the improved electoral performance of the APC in Rivers State, which underscored his impact.

His eventual appointment as FCT Minister was widely seen as both a reward for loyalty and a strategic political decision.
Since assuming office as FCT Minister in 2023, Wike has overseen several visible infrastructure projects. Road construction and rehabilitation across Abuja, including major arterial roads, upgrades to key government facilities, and traffic-easing projects, have improved connectivity within the capital. These developments align with the administration’s broader policy direction and counter claims that the FCT has been neglected. At the same time, concerns remain about service delivery gaps, environmental management, and administrative focus. Critics argue that Wike’s continued involvement in Rivers State politics distracts from his ministerial responsibilities, though some of these structural challenges existed before his tenure.

Former Governor Wike’s continued influence in Rivers State has been the most contentious issue. His open support for political factions opposed to Governor Siminalayi Fubara, including legislative defections and impeachment threats, has deepened political instability in the state. This crisis has led to prolonged legislative standoffs and security concerns, with potential implications for oil production and economic stability. Supporters argue that Wike is defending political interests and investments built over years, while critics see his actions as undue interference that undermines democratic mandates and sets a troubling precedent. Although, presidential interventions have temporarily eased tensions, the situation remains fragile.

Beyond Rivers State, Wike’s combative political style and public defiance have raised questions about discipline, loyalty, and unity within the ruling party. His expulsion from the PDP and outspoken posture have fueled perceptions of political overreach. However, calls for his removal must be considered carefully. Removing him outright could alienate key allies and reopen political divisions that the ruling government is still managing, while ignoring ongoing disruptions risks creating the impression that loyalty outweighs accountability.

Fair leadership demands balance. While Wike’s contributions to the 2023 elections and his infrastructure drive in the FCT are evident, persistent political instability linked to his actions cannot be ignored if it threatens national interest. Therefore, measured options such as firm mediation, clearer boundaries on political conduct, or reassignment of responsibilities, rather than an abrupt dismissal as clamoured by his foes, may achieve stability without appearing punitive or ungrateful.

In the end, Nigeria’s interest lies not in polarised calls for removal or blind loyalty, but in pragmatic leadership that rewards service while enforcing accountability. Wike’s record shows both capacity for delivery and a tendency toward political volatility. Addressing this contradiction, by refocusing his attention on governance and reducing political distractions, offers a more constructive path for Abuja’s stability and lasting peace in Rivers State.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

13/01/2026

Two Crowns, One Heritage: Tradition, Protocol, and the Call for Yoruba Harmony

The recent public tension between the Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Akeem Abimbola Owoade, and the Olubadan of Ibadanland, Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja, arose from a moment at the 2026 Inter-Faith Service in Ibadan that many interpreted differently. During the event, the Alaafin, already seated, extended his hand as the Olubadan approached. The Olubadan acknowledged others present, including the Governor of Oyo State, before taking his seat without responding to the gesture. What might otherwise have passed as a fleeting protocol lapse quickly grew into a wider debate, reigniting long-standing discussions about Yoruba traditional hierarchy, history, and mutual respect.

Observers at the event offered contrasting interpretations. Some Ibadan stakeholders viewed the act of extending a handshake while seated as a breach of etiquette, especially on Ibadan soil, and regarded the expectation of response as improper. Others, particularly from Oyo, saw the gesture as a courteous greeting rooted in the Alaafin’s historical status and considered the non-response discourteous. As reactions spread, the issue moved beyond the two monarchs themselves and became amplified by supporters, commentators, and cultural advocates on both sides. To understand why such an incident carries weight, it is important to appreciate the historical paths of both institutions. The Alaafin’s throne represents the legacy of the Oyo Empire, which from the 17th to the early 19th century stood as one of the most powerful Yoruba states. The Alaafin was regarded as an imperial ruler, and many kings paid homage during ceremonial occasions. This legacy still shapes perceptions of Oyo as a symbol of ancient Yoruba unity and authority.

Ibadan’s story followed a different course. Founded in the early 19th century by warriors and refugees during a period of upheaval, Ibadan grew into a formidable military republic. It filled the power vacuum left by the decline of Oyo, expanded its influence across large parts of Yorubaland, and played a decisive role in resisting external domination. Its political culture emphasized achievement, service, and seniority rather than royal bloodline, a philosophy that later shaped the Olubadan system. These different histories produced two distinct but equally respected models of kingship. The Alaafin’s institution is rooted in sacred lineage and imperial tradition, with selection confined to ruling houses and guided by long-established councils and rituals. The Olubadan, by contrast, emerges through a structured rotational ladder that is open to all male indigenes of Ibadan who serve the city over time, whether in civil or military capacities. This system rewards patience, experience, and communal contribution.

In contemporary Nigeria, both rulers are officially recognised as paramount monarchs within their respective territories. Each plays vital roles in cultural preservation, dispute resolution, community leadership, and advisory engagement with government. Their authority is significant but clearly territorial, and neither diminishes the legitimacy of the other. The present controversy has therefore less to do with legal rank than with perception, symbolism, and emotion. Some voices in Ibadan frame the issue as a defense of local dignity and autonomy, while some in Oyo interpret it as a challenge to historical prestige. More balanced perspectives note that the monarchs themselves have not engaged in public confrontation and that the sharpest rhetoric often comes from supporters projecting inherited grievances onto a modern setting.

In a society facing economic, social, and security challenges, many neutral observers have called for restraint and dialogue. They remind the public that Yoruba history is not a single story but a shared tapestry woven from different experiences, each contributing to collective survival and identity. Both the Alaafin and the Olubadan stand as custodians of that heritage.
Ultimately, the episode serves as a reminder that tradition gains strength not from rivalry, but from mutual respect and wisdom. Protocol should guide conduct, history should inform understanding, and leadership, especially at the level of revered institutions, should rise above momentary slights. In honoring one another, Yoruba monarchs reaffirm not only their individual thrones, but the unity and dignity of the culture they represent.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

09/01/2026

Rivers at a Crossroads: Impeachment Politics, Godfatherism, and Tinubu’s 2027 Calculus

Nigeria’s political space is sharply divided over allegations linking former Rivers State governor and FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike, to the ongoing impeachment move against Governor Siminalayi Fubara. While the Rivers State House of Assembly insists the process is a constitutionally driven exercise, Fubara’s allies, civil society groups, and segments of the APC describe it as a politically orchestrated attempt to destabilize the governor.

The impeachment notice, dated January 8, 2026, has intensified tensions in Rivers State. Notably, Governor Fubara has not issued a direct public response, with senior government officials explaining that no formal reaction will occur until the notice is properly served, in line with Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution. Upon service, the governor has seven days to respond before any investigative panel can be constituted.
Allies of the governor have, however, been vocal. Former Commissioner Austin Tam-George dismissed the impeachment notice as “dead on arrival,” citing vague allegations, Fubara’s governance record, and what he described as political orchestration following the governor’s defection to the APC. Rivers APC similarly rejected the impeachment process, calling it destabilizing, harmful to party unity, and a distraction from governance, especially coming after the passage of the 2025 budget.

On the other side, Assembly spokesperson Enemi George and pro-impeachment lawmakers deny any external influence, particularly from Wike. They maintain that the impeachment move is an independent legislative action prompted by alleged gross misconduct, including claims of over ₦800 billion in extra-budgetary expenditures. According to them, the process is neither vindictive nor politically motivated.

Fubara’s supporters and critics of the impeachment counter this narrative, alleging that the Assembly is dominated by Wike loyalists acting as proxies. They argue that the impeachment violates the political peace accord reportedly brokered by President Bola Tinubu and accuse Wike’s public rhetoric of inflaming tensions. Civil society groups such as the Campaign for Democracy, HURIWA, the Ijaw National Congress (INC), and the Ijaw Youth Council (IYC) have condemned the process, urging federal intervention to prevent further instability.
Beyond Rivers State, analysts warn that the prolonged crisis carries serious national political implications. Rivers remains a PDP stronghold that President Tinubu narrowly secured at the federal level in the 2023 elections. An unresolved or successful impeachment could alienate APC supporters in the state, deepen perceptions of godfatherism, weaken Tinubu’s political leverage ahead of the 2027 elections, and energise PDP mobilisation. There are also concerns that the crisis could fracture APC unity in Rivers, portraying the Tinubu administration as unable to enforce its own peace agreements or protect sitting governors aligned with it. Local political observers caution that prolonged instability could trigger voter backlash, worsen insecurity, and significantly boost PDP prospects in the 2027 gubernatorial election.

It is worthy of note, that the Rivers impeachment saga has evolved beyond a state-level constitutional dispute into a high-stakes political test, one that will shape party cohesion, federal-state relations, and electoral calculations heading into 2027.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

05/01/2026

US Capture of Nicolás Maduro: A Crisis of Sovereignty, Security, and Global Order

On January 3, 2026, the United States carried out a dramatic military operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. The overnight strikes targeted military facilities in Caracas, including air defense systems. US officials justified the action by citing longstanding allegations of drug trafficking, corruption, and electoral manipulation. President Donald Trump described the raid as the largest US intervention in Latin America since the 1989 invasion of Panama, pledging American oversight until Venezuela undergoes a “stable” political transition. Maduro is expected to face trial in New York.

Within Venezuela, reactions were deeply polarized. Opposition supporters celebrated in the streets, viewing the capture as the collapse of an authoritarian system that presided over years of economic decline, shortages, and mass emigration. The Venezuelan diaspora echoed these celebrations abroad. Conversely, Maduro’s supporters condemned the operation as an illegal abduction of a sitting head of state. Protests broke out in Caracas, a national emergency was declared, and loyalist forces were mobilized. These responses reflect long-standing political fractures that have intensified amid Venezuela’s prolonged crisis.

Internationally, condemnation has dominated. Russia denounced the operation as armed aggression, while China labeled it a violation of sovereignty and an expression of US hegemonic power. Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva warned that sidelining multilateral institutions risks pushing the international system toward chaos and violence. Colombia and Mexico rejected the breach of sovereignty, with Mexico invoking the UN Charter. The European Union urged restraint while acknowledging doubts over Maduro’s legitimacy, and the United Kingdom called for further clarification from Washington. The United Nations warned that the action sets a dangerous precedent that undermines international law, with Spain and Denmark also calling for de-escalation.

Beyond diplomatic fallout, the security implications are profound. The operation raises the risk of indirect involvement by Russia or China, large-scale refugee movements, and regional instability reminiscent of the post-Panama intervention period. Critics argue that the raid violated international prohibitions on the use of force and normalized the extrajudicial capture of foreign leaders. Such precedents weaken global deterrence and erode norms designed to prevent unilateral military action. At the core of this crisis lies the erosion of sovereignty. Legal experts question the operation’s legality under international law, pointing to violations of head-of-state immunity and concerns that US control over Venezuela’s political transition amounts to a form of modern imperial “state capture.” If normalized, this approach could embolden powerful states to intervene militarily in weaker nations, destabilizing post-colonial international order and threatening global peace.

Increasingly, President Donald Trump himself is emerging as a destabilizing force in global affairs. His willingness to bypass international institutions, disregard established legal norms, and frame military intervention as a tool of political leverage signals a troubling shift toward unilateralism. This approach not only heightens the risk of armed conflict but also weakens the credibility of international law, making the global system more volatile and unpredictable.

The crisis demands urgent and coordinated action to prevent escalation and restore stability:

1. Immediate Multilateral Engagement

The United Nations, alongside regional bodies such as the Organization of American States, must convene emergency talks to de-escalate tensions and reaffirm the primacy of international law.

2. International Legal Review

An independent legal assessment of the operation should be conducted to clarify violations of international norms and reinforce accountability mechanisms for all states, regardless of power.

3. Protection of Venezuelan
Self-Determination

Any political transition in Venezuela must be led by Venezuelans themselves through internationally supervised, credible electoral processes, not imposed by foreign military force.

4. Constraints on Unilateral Military Action

Global powers must recommit to multilateral decision-making and strengthen norms that limit the use of force, particularly against sovereign states.

5. Humanitarian and Regional Stabilization Efforts

Neighbouring countries and international organizations should prepare coordinated responses to potential refugee flows and economic disruptions to prevent wider regional fallout.

From a public affairs perspective, the lesson is clear: restoring respect for sovereignty, international law, and multilateral diplomacy is essential. Without these barriers, the world risks sliding into an era where power replaces principle, and where global peace becomes increasingly fragile.

Oluwole Terebo, Ph.D
Public Affairs Analyst

Guage Media Concept

01/08/2026

08/02/2026

30/01/2026

25/01/2026

24/01/2026

13/01/2026

09/01/2026

05/01/2026

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Listing takedown request