Why we removed Buhari’s Govt in 1985 through Military coup – IBB gives further revelations
In a striking revelation, former military president General Ibrahim Babangida (retd) has shed light on the underlying cause of Major General Muhammadu Buhari’s ousting in 1985. According to Babangida, the removal of Buhari was a direct result of his tendency to personalize leadership during his time as Head of State.
Buhari, who initially came to power in a military coup in December 1983 that removed then-President Shehu Shagari, was himself toppled two years later. Babangida, who played a pivotal role in that power shift, shared insights in his book ‘A Journey in Service’, where he discussed the “holier-than-thou” mindset exhibited by both Buhari and his deputy, the late Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon. This approach, Babangida argued, alienated the military and the general public, pushing the nation to a critical tipping point.
Reflecting on the events that led to the 1985 coup, Babangida pointed out that Buhari’s leadership style not only distanced him from his own military constituency but also led to a breakdown in relations with the civil populace, which ultimately paved the way for his ouster.
His words: “The change in leadership had become necessary as a response to the worsening mood of the nation and growing concern about our future as a people. All through the previous day, as we flew from Minna and drove through Lagos towards Bonny Camp, I was deeply reflecting on how we as a nation got to this point and how and why I found myself at this juncture of fate. By the beginning of 1985, the citizenry had become apprehensive about the future of our country.
The atmosphere was precarious and fraught with ominous signs of clear and present danger. It was clear to the more discerning leadership of the armed forces that our initial rescue mission of 1983 had largely miscarried.
We now stood the risk of having the armed forces split down the line because our rescue mission had largely derailed. If the armed forces imploded, the nation would go with it, and the end was just too frightening to contemplate. Divisions of opinion within the armed forces had come to replace the unanimity of purpose that informed the December 1983 change of government.
In state affairs, the armed forces, as the only remaining institution of national cohesion, were becoming torn into factions; something needed to be done lest we lose the nation itself. My greatest fear was that division of opinion and views within the armed forces could lead to factionalisation in the military. If allowed to continue and gain root, grave dangers lay ahead.
“My predecessor in office, Major General Muhammadu Buhari, and his deputy, Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon, had separated themselves from the mainstream of the armed forces by personalising what was initially a collective leadership. They both posited a ‘holier than thou’ attitude, antagonising the civil populace against the military. Fundamental rights and freedoms were being routinely infringed upon and abused. As a military administration, we were now presiding over a society that was primarily frightened of us. We were supposed to improve their lives and imbue the people with hope for a better future.
“Instead, we ruled the nation with a series of draconian decrees. An administration intended to reflect the collective will of the armed forces as a national institution came to be seen as the private personal autocracy of a stubborn few. Like most military coups, our leadership change was informed by widespread disquiet among the civil populace. Ordinary people were experiencing severe economic hardship. The general economic and social conditions the people lived under were worsening by the day.
“Yet arbitrary controls in all aspects of economic life and an ancient resort to barter in international trade meant that the nation’s financial woes would not end soon. Draconian decrees led to the abuse and severe limitation of basic freedoms as people were clamped into indefinite detention, most times for minor infractions. Punishment for crimes against the state had led to the pursuit of mechanical legalistic justice against the dictates of natural justice. As the Chief of Army Staff, I was under undue pressure from the rank and file to seek ways of reconnecting the government to society lest we lose the nation itself.
“On several occasions and instances, even the very integrity of the armed forces was being called into question. A disciplinary case involving allegations of divided interest against some senior officers was decided without due recourse to the Army Council. Instead of waiting for a report and investigation from the Army leadership, the affected officers were unceremoniously relieved of their commission, and their military career of so many years was abruptly ended without any input from the Army as their institution of origin. I objected to this arbitrariness and disregard for due process. I confided in some senior colleagues that I would rather resign my commission than continue in office as Chief of Army Staff without input into decisions that concern the careers of personnel under my command.
“In response, I was placed under surveillance, with the privacy of my communications and those of my family constantly monitored. This tense atmosphere culminated in the unanimous decision of a broad spectrum of senior and middle-level officers to change the nation’s leadership. The processes associated with this change were completed without bloodshed by midnight on August 26, 1985. ON AUGUST 27, 1985, I assumed office as the nation’s new leader, fully aware of the many challenge confronting the country. I had no illusions about the direction in which to move the country. I had long-standing convictions about Nigeria born of many decades of comprehensive consultations with a broad spectrum of compatriots from nearly all walks of life. Having been part of all previous government changes, I had become quite familiar with the wishes and aspirations of our people and developed a template of what needed to be done, at least from my modest perspective. The new administration’s determination was informed by a genuine desire to end the cycle of instability in both the politics and general history of the nation. I made this clear in my inaugural address to the nation.”
