Olusegun Obasanjo

==Political ideology==
Ideologically, Obasanjo was a [[Nigerian nationalism|Nigerian nationalist]].{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=13}} He was committed to a form of Nigerian patriotism and the belief that Nigeria should be retained as a single nation-state, rather than being broken up along ethnic lines.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=2}} In 2001, he stated that his long-term goal was "the nullification of all forms of identification except Nigerian citizenship". He argued that dismantling Nigeria along ethnic lines would result in the ethnic cleansing and violence that had been seen during the [[Yugoslav Wars]] of the 1990s.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=2}} Ilife argued that Obasanjo's Nigerian nationalism was impacted both by his detachment from the Yoruba elite and by his time in the army, where he worked alongside soldiers from a broad range of ethnic backgrounds.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=13}}

{{Quote box
| quote = Democracy may not necessarily ensure rapid economic development or affluence but it is, at least, the best form of government so far devised that ensures reasonable participation by [the] majority of people in the means and issues that concern their governance. Democracy is the option which the governed prefer...<br>In the Nigerian situation, democracy is the only integrative glue that can bind different sub-national groups together into a nation with common destinies, equal status and common identity on a permanent basis.
| source=— Olusegun Obasanjo on democracy, 1990{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=115}}
| align = left
| width = 25em
}}

Iliffe noted that an emphasis on [[consensus politics]] was "a guiding principle" throughout Obasanjo's career.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=45}} While in power during the 1970s, Obasanjo expressed criticism of "institutionalized opposition" to the government.{{sfn|Derfler|2011|p=88}} In his view this was "profoundly incongruent with most African political culture and practice."{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=114}} Instead of constantly opposing the government, he believed that opposition parties should instead offer [[constructive criticism]],{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=114}} and that politicians should pursue a search for consensus rather than engaging in constant competition. He thought that political competition had a destabilising effect that was particularly dangerous for a developing country such as Nigeria, and that stability should be preserved.{{sfn|Derfler|2011|p=88}}
[[File:Olusegun Obasanjo 2014.jpg|thumb|right|Obasanjo speaking at the [[African Development Bank Group]] annual meeting in [[Kigali]] in 2014]]
Frustrated with what he regarded as the failures of representative democratic rule during the early 1980s, Obasanjo began expressing support for a [[one-party state]] in Nigeria. He nevertheless insisted that this one-party state must facilitate general public participation in governance, respect human rights, and protect freedom of expression.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=114}} Later in the 1980s, he warned against the proposed two-party state which Babangida was putting forward, believing that while Babangida envisioned a centre-left and centre-right party competing against each other, it would inevitably develop into one party representing the Christian south and the other representing the Muslim north.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=114}} He instead argued that there should be no limit on the number of political parties that could be formed, although suggested that if this could not occur then Nigeria should become a one-party state.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=114}} Amid the collapse of the [[Soviet Union]] in the early 1990s and the subsequent move towards multi-party politics across Africa, Obasanjo again became supportive of multi-party systems.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=130}}

Iliffe noted that as a politician, Obasanjo displayed an "open-minded pragmatism".{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=73}} A tactic employed by Obasanjo at various points was to deliberately polarise an issue so as to rally support for his perspective.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=74}}
Iliffe thought that although Obasanjo had been too young to play a major role in the anti-colonialist struggle for Nigerian independence from British rule, he was "marked for ever" by the "optimism and dedication" of the independence movement.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=2}}

In office, Obasanjo's task was to ensure that Nigeria functioned both politically and economically. Over the course of his political career, Obasanjo moved from the belief in the advantages of state involvement in heavy industry, which was common in the 1970s, to a commitment to market liberalism that had become dominant in the 1990s.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|pp=2-3}} Iliffe thought that throughout his career, Obasanjo had always displayed an "ambivalence" about the level of state involvement in the economy. His general attitude was that poverty was caused by idleness.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|pp=201, 204}} While campaigning for the 1999 presidential election, Obasanjo called himself a "market-oriented social democrat" although was vague on his proposed economic strategy.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=172}} During his presidency, his government brought together figures who were committed to free markets, who favoured more [[Protectionism|protectionist]] economic strategies, and those sympathetic to socialism.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=204}} Obasanjo was contemptuous of ideological arguments about capitalism and socialism.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=57}} The decisions he took were usually based on political considerations rather than on legal or constitutional principles, something which was a source of concern for some of his critics.{{sfn|Iliffe|2011|p=3}} Derfler thought that during his first term in office, Obasanjo was a "cautious reformer".{{sfn|Derfler|2011|p=86}}