Wike’s Gambit and the APC’s Rivers Dilemma

Wike’s Gambit and the APC’s Rivers Dilemma

The unfolding drama between Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, and the leadership of the All Progressives Congress (APC) has become more than a local skirmish, it is a test case for the balance of power within Nigeria’s ruling party.

Wike’s sharp rebuke to APC National Secretary, Senator Ajibola Basiru, to “hands off Rivers politics” is not merely a defensive gesture; it is a calculated move to preserve his political relevance in a state that has long been his stronghold.

At the heart of the matter lies the defection of Governor Siminalayi Fubara to the APC. By convention, governors who join or belong to the APC are recognized as the party’s leaders in their states, a tradition that consolidates their authority and often secures their political future.

Wike, however, sees this as a direct encroachment on his influence. His insistence that Rivers State is a “no-go area” for APC national officers reflects his determination to prevent the party’s machinery from sidelining him.

For Wike, the battle is not about party loyalty, he is not even a member of the APC, but about safeguarding his legacy and ensuring that his political footprint in Rivers remains indelible.

Senator Basiru’s counterattack is equally telling. By urging Wike to resign his ministerial post if he wishes to continue his battles in Rivers, Basiru frames Wike’s obsession with state politics as a distraction from his national duties. His defense of Governor Fubara, whom Wike’s allies have derisively referred to as “the so-called Governor,” underscores the APC’s resolve to legitimize Fubara’s leadership and assert the party’s authority in Rivers.

Basiru’s remarks also signal a broader frustration within the APC: Wike’s dual role as a federal minister and a local power broker is seen as destabilizing, forcing President Bola Tinubu into a precarious balancing act.

The implications of this feud extend beyond Rivers. Wike’s defiance challenges the APC’s internal cohesion, particularly in the South-South region where the party has struggled to gain firm ground.

If Wike succeeds in undermining the convention that governors lead the party in their states, it could set a precedent that weakens APC’s organizational discipline nationwide. Conversely, if the APC leadership manages to curtail Wike’s influence, it would reinforce the authority of governors and strengthen the party’s institutional framework.

For President Tinubu, the stakes are high. His administration relies on Wike’s political dexterity in Abuja, where the FCT minister has already demonstrated his capacity to deliver results. Yet, Tinubu cannot afford to alienate the APC’s national officers or risk a fracture in the party’s unity.

The Rivers crisis thus becomes a microcosm of the broader challenge facing Tinubu: how to balance loyalty to influential allies with the imperative of party stability.

In the end, Wike’s confrontation with Basiru is more than a war of words. It is a struggle over the soul of Rivers politics and, by extension, a test of the APC’s resilience as Nigeria’s ruling party.

Whether Wike’s gambit succeeds or fails will shape not only the future of Rivers State but also the trajectory of national politics in the years to come.