No Betrayal in Kano: Kwankwaso Faces the Consequences of His Own Political Playbook

Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso’s reaction to Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf’s reported defection from the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) has stirred intense political debate, particularly after the former presidential candidate reportedly described the move as a “betrayal.” Yet, when viewed against the backdrop of Kano State’s political history—and Kwankwaso’s own political journey—such a claim appears deeply ironic and largely inconsistent with precedent.

Kano politics has, for decades, followed a familiar pattern: political godfathers facilitate the emergence of governors, only for those governors to later assert independence and sever ties with their benefactors. This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it unique to the present political climate. In 1979, the revered Mallam Aminu Kano played a central role in helping Abubakar Rimi become governor, yet the relationship later collapsed in a dramatic fallout. That episode set a precedent that has since repeated itself in various forms across generations.

The same cycle re-emerged in 1998 when Musa Gwadabe was instrumental in helping Rabiu Kwankwaso secure the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) ticket and win the governorship of Kano State. However, once in office, Kwankwaso eventually broke away from Gwadabe, asserting his political independence. History repeated itself again when Kwankwaso played a decisive role in the emergence of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje as governor in 2015, only for Ganduje to later distance himself and build his own political structure outside Kwankwaso’s influence.

Fast forward to 2023, and the pattern remained unchanged. Kwankwaso was pivotal to the emergence of Abba Kabir Yusuf as governor under the NNPP platform. Yet, just like those before him, Governor Yusuf has now charted a different political path, reportedly aligning with the APC. In this context, Kwankwaso’s lamentation over “betrayal” appears less like a moral grievance and more like the shock of a political reality he himself helped normalize.

The fundamental question, therefore, is this: why should an incumbent governor in Kano remain perpetually loyal to a political godfather, when every governor before him—including Kwankwaso himself—has rejected such permanent subservience? If Kwankwaso could not remain under the control of Musa Gwadabe, and Ganduje could not remain under Kwankwaso, on what moral or political basis should Abba Yusuf be expected to remain eternally beholden to Kwankwaso?

Beyond Kano’s internal political history, Kwankwaso’s personal political record further weakens his argument. In 2014, he defected from the PDP to the APC, despite having won the governorship in 2011 on the PDP platform, without vacating his office. Later, in 2018, he again switched parties—this time from the APC to the PDP—after winning a Senate seat in 2015 under the APC banner, once again without relinquishing his mandate. These decisions were driven by political calculations, ambition, and shifting alliances—exactly the same forces that shape the decisions of today’s political actors.

Seen through this lens, Governor Abba Yusuf’s reported defection is not an extraordinary act of betrayal, but rather a continuation of Nigeria’s entrenched political culture, where loyalty is fluid and political alignment is often dictated by strategy rather than sentiment. Nigerian politics has long been defined by defections, realignments, and shifting coalitions, especially as election seasons approach and power dynamics evolve.

This is not necessarily an endorsement of Yusuf’s decision, nor is it an attack on Kwankwaso’s political legacy. Rather, it is a call for intellectual honesty and consistency. One cannot benefit from a system of political mobility and realignment for decades, and then suddenly condemn the same system when it operates against one’s interests.

At a deeper level, the controversy exposes the persistent problem of godfatherism in Nigerian politics. While mentorship and political sponsorship are not inherently wrong, the expectation that an elected governor should function as a political puppet undermines democratic principles. Democracy is built on popular mandate, not inherited loyalty. Once elected, a governor derives legitimacy from the জনগ people, not from the individual who facilitated his rise.

In the end, what is happening in Kano is less about betrayal and more about political evolution. Kwankwaso is experiencing the same political reality that Musa Gwadabe and the PDP once faced at his hands. It is the cyclical nature of power, influence, and ambition in Nigerian politics.

Simply put, the pills being swallowed today are the same ones that were once administered yesterday. In politics, as in life, history has a way of repeating itself—only the actors change.