This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nigerias-presidential-vote-marred-by-prospect-of-violence/2015/03/28/c917eba8-d164-11e4-8b1e-274d670aa9c9_story.html?wprss=rss_world

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Nigeria’s presidential vote marred by prospect of violence Nigeria votes in bitterly contested election
(about 7 hours later)
KADUNA, Nigeria — Voting began here Saturday morning in the most divisive election since Nigeria emerged from military rule 16 years ago. But hovering over the polls were fears that violence could come from two disparate sources: Boko Haram insurgents and voters angered by the defeat of their candidate. KADUNA, Nigeria —Nigerians voted Saturday in the most bitterly contested elections in the history of the country’s young democracy — a poll that will determine the next chapter in a long-standing fight against Islamist insurgents and the management of Africa’s largest economy.
By early afternoon, a car bomb had exploded in southern Enugu state, and voting irregularities raised concerns about a timely and accurate result. But mostly, Nigerians waited in long lines to participate in an election that has enormous implications not just for Africa’s most populous country but for much of the continent. Voting was extended to Sunday because of technical glitches, as the specter of post-election violence hangs over much of the country. Many worry that a conflict will erupt along the ethno-religious divide that consumes Nigerian politics. For now, President Goodluck Jonathan, a southern Christian, and the former military dictator, Muhammadu Buhari, a northern Muslim, appear to be in a dead heat.
In this northern state, which experienced violence after 2011’s presidential election, voters came out in droves to vote for the opposition candidate, former military dictator Maj. Gen. Muhammadu Buhari. His supporters expressed a commitment to a peaceful poll this time but also a certainty that Buhari would defeat the incumbent, President Goodluck Jonathan. This northern state has been a microcosm of the country’s volatile political rift. After the last presidential election, in 2011, Kaduna was devoured by violence that killed nearly a thousand people. Churches­ and mosques­ were torched, their skeletal remains still scattered across the state. Christians and Muslims fled in opposite directions.
“If Jonathan wins unfairly, this will be a country at war,” said Nura Hussaini, who stood in line for his accreditation on the morning of the election — the first step in a lengthy voting process that probably will not end until Saturday night. Four years later, it’s unclear whether a contested election result will reignite those festering tensions. Over the past four years, while NGOs and interfaith groups have launched peace building initiatives, Nigeria’s political elite have done little to bridge the divide. Jonathan and Buhari signed a pact last week, promising to avoid post-election violence, but many of their followers saw it as a hollow gesture.
The country already is at war with Boko Haram, an insurgency that has grown steadily since 2012 to the point where its influence extended across northeastern Nigeria. A multinational counteroffensive has severely weakened the group in recent weeks. “We’re scared,” said Rhoda Bala, standing in the charred remains of her home, which was destroyed after the 2011 election and never fully repaired. “Of course, we worry that what happened last time will happen again.”
[The Islamic State, Boko Haram and the evolution of international jihad] Bala lives just miles from a polling site where voters seemingly unanimously supported Buhari, and where a Jonathan victory appeared inconceivable to voters.
The bomb in Enugu state, which did not kill anyone, made clear Saturday that insurgents still retain the capacity to wage guerrilla-style attacks. Witnesses said Boko Haram gunmen forced three northeastern polling stations to be abandoned, the Associated Press reported. But there was much less violence than many expected. “If Jonathan wins unfairly, this will be a country at war,” said Nura Hussaini, a carpenter. “And he can’t win fairly.”
“We’ve all been affected by Boko Haram here. People have lost sons and brothers. We are voting for a government that will do more,” said Huwaila Umar, a Buhari supporter. The country is already at war with Boko Haram, an Islamist extremist movement that grew steadily since 2012, until its influence extended across northeastern Nigeria. On Saturday, Boko Haram extremists killed 39 people, including a legislator, in northeastern Nigeria, according to the Associated Press, in a deliberate attempt to disrupt the election. A multinational counter­offensive has severely weakened the group in recent weeks, after security officials requested an emergency six-week election delay.
An incumbent has never lost a Nigerian presidential contest, and pre-election polls show a dead heat between Buhari and Jonathan. Jonathan supporters had praised him for the success of the anti-Boko Haram campaign, which culminated Saturday in the taking of the group’s strategic headquarters. His detractors ask why it took so long to execute.
[Who are the two candidates running to become the president of Nigeria?] Already, Buhari’s party has said that if Jonathan, who has been in power since 2010, is declared the victor, it will set up a “parallel government.”
That has raised concerns about a violent reaction no matter who wins. In 2011, in a much less contentious race between the same candidates, about 1,000 people were killed in post-election bloodshed. The Nigerian army’s chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Kenneth Minimah, issued a warning at a news conference, saying that anyone who provokes conflict will meet “organized violence” from authorities.
Already, Buhari’s party has said that if Jonathan is declared the victor, it will set up a “parallel government.” While many Nigerians view politics through the prism of regional or religious loyalty, the election’s result will have an impact across much of West Africa, where the country has a massive cultural and economic force. It’s a region dominated by Nigerian film and music, where oil revenue turned the country into an engine of growth.
The Nigerian army’s chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Kenneth Minimah, issued a warning at a news conference, saying that anyone who provokes violence will meet “organized violence” from authorities. The falling price of oil, though, has raised new questions about Nigeria’s financial future, adding urgency to calls for an end to systemic corruption. Jonathan Central Bank chairman accused the government of losing 20 billion in revenue.
“The elections have the potential to be profoundly destabilizing. If the country degenerates into widespread violence, that has an impact across West Africa,” said John Campbell, a former U.S. ambassador to Nigeria who is now at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. The next chapter in the fight against Boko Haram also remains a massive challenge. While the group appears to have been displaced from its former territorial strongholds, thousands of militants have fled into the Sambisa Forest and other rural enclaves, from which they could easily plan guerrilla-style attacks if the government’s counterinsurgency campaign dissipates.
In Kaduna, many voters grew frustrated when election materials arrived late — or didn’t arrive at all — a flaw that they saw as a government attempt to keep them from voting. But the next president’s greatest challenge might be convincing a divided Nigeria to accept his legitimacy. In Kaduna, even the most unifying figures expressed concerns about the coming days. Pastor Yohanna Buru, who has spent the years since the violence of 2011 leading interfaith sessions, wonders what is next.
“It’s a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise us because they know this is an opposition enclave,” said Danazumi Zakari, the chairman of the development association in Danbushia village. “The fact is, Christians want a Christian leader and Muslims want a Muslim one,” he said. “People are not educated on the issue of political violence.”
Zakari stood with hundreds of others in front of a local elementary school that was supposed to serve as a polling site. But by noon, five hours after many voters had arrived, there were still no voting materials. Reports from Nigeria’s south, which is predominantly pro-Jonathan, also cited voting irregularities, suggesting that flaws were systemic and not politically calculated. At a polling place where Jonathan supporters predominated, voters worried about a Nigeria with a Muslim leader.
Boko Haram is one of many issues on which the election will turn. Oil production, which accounts for 70 percent of Nigeria’s economy, is no longer as profitable as it once was because prices have plunged. "It would mean the Islamicization of Nigeria," said Thomas Usman, an engineer. "We can't allow it."
Corruption plagues many of the country’s public institutions. An ethnic and religious divide is already pronounced between the mostly Muslim north and the Christian south. Buhari is Muslim, whereas Jonathan is Christian. Buhari has never given the impression that he will abandon secular rule in Nigeria. His party has publicly refuted the idea, claiming that Jonathan supporters are attempting to divide the electorate along religious lines.
“I am not a religious fanatic of any sort, and I have never been,” he said at an interfaith meeting earlier this month.
Each side pointed to voting irregularities that appeared to favor the opposition – a shortage of ballots at certain sites, delayed openings at polling centers that left many voters in line for more than 10 hours.
“It’s a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise us because they know this is an opposition enclave,” said Danazumi Zakari, the chairman of the development association in Danbushia village and a Buhari supporter.
Zakari stood with hundreds of others in front of a local elementary school that was supposed to serve as a polling site. But by noon, five hours after many voters arrived, there were still no voting materials. Reports from Nigeria’s south, which is predominantly pro-Jonathan, also cited voting irregularities, suggesting that flaws were systemic and not politically calculated.
Voting ended on Saturday without any sign of clashes between the two parties. But in Kaduna, voters remember the relative peace of election day in 2011, and how quickly the state devolved into chaos after the results were announced.
Rhoda Bala, 55, a Christian living in a primarily Muslim part of Kaduna, remembers returning to her home one day to find that it had been doused in gasoline and set on fire. She hasn’t found the money to fix it, so she and her children still live in the charred remains.
The words “Jesus loves you” can be made out in faded paint. This time, most of Bala’s relatives left Kaduna before the elections. Bala didn’t.
“I’m too scared,” she said. “And I don’t have anywhere else to go.”