Arewa Mandate for Unity and National Rebirth (AMUNR), has criticized former vice president, Atiku Abubakar for his recent attack on former President Goodluck Jonathan.
Atiku, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 general election, had on Wednesday described Jonathan’s presidency as a ‘product of inexperience, among other unsavoury remarks.
But reacting to the development on Thursday, AMUNR, through a statement signed by Danladi Luka Ishiaku and Basiru Usman Wakili, National Coordinator and National Secretary respectively, urged Atiku to pursue his presidential ambition without looking for who to blame for his years of political misfortune.
AMUNR said contrary to Atiku’s wrong narrative, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan served Nigeria for 16 uninterrupted years from deputy governor to governor, vice president to acting president and president of the country for five years, adding that he was much more prepared to serve Nigeria at the highest level, with achievements that are yet to be equalled by any Nigerian leader in history.
The group said Atiku has failed to achieve his presidential ambition, partly due to what it described as desperation and impatience which it said was responsible for his movement from PDP to three different parties and back to PDP and now to ADC, saying Atiku would have served as president under the PDP of he had allowed Jonathan to complete his terms without disrupting the system.
It therefore advised the former president to blame himself and not Jonathan for his political woes.
AMUNR said- “Our attention has been drawn to the now familiar comments by former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who has chosen to substitute revisionism for reality by branding Dr. Goodluck Jonathan’s presidency as a product of “inexperience.” This claim is not just wrong; it is mischievous.
“Dr. Jonathan rose through every constitutional rung of leadership—Deputy Governor, Governor, Vice-President, and Acting President during the national uncertainty that followed the illness of Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. To dismiss that trajectory as “inexperience” is either a willful distortion of facts or a troubling misunderstanding of governance itself.
“But perhaps the more pressing question is this: from what vantage point is this judgment being made?
“Here is a man who has spent decades in perpetual pursuit of the presidency contesting, recalibrating, and returning, yet has never once borne the full weight of that office. It is, therefore, remarkable that someone whose “experience” is defined largely by ambition now seeks to diminish the record of someone whose experience was tested in office, under pressure, and in history’s full glare.
“Under Dr. Jonathan, Nigeria did not drift, it advanced. The economy was rebased, emerging as Africa’s largest. The power sector was unbundled after years of entrenched dysfunction. Agricultural corruption networks were dismantled. Rail and road infrastructure, long abandoned, were revived. These are not opinions; they are verifiable milestones.
“And then came the defining moment: when faced with the choice between personal power and national peace, Dr. Jonathan chose Nigeria. His peaceful concession in 2015 remains one of the most consequential acts of democratic leadership on the continent, an act that secured stability and earned global respect.
“That is what real leadership looks like.
“To now hear that legacy casually reduced to “inexperience” is not merely ironic, it is an attempt to gaslight a nation that lived through, and benefited from, those years.
“Nigerians remember. They remember results. They remember restraint. And they certainly remember who governed, and who merely aspired to.
“If experience is the argument, then the distinction is clear: one man has a record that can be scrutinized; the other has a résumé of repeated attempts.
“Dr. Jonathan’s legacy is not up for casual dismissal. It is written in policy, in progress, and in the democratic stability Nigeria still enjoys today.
“No amount of political revisionism can undo that record,” AMUNR concluded.
