Wike Clarifies Controversial Comments on PDP Governors: "No Intent to Burn Oyo or Bauchi"
In a recent interview, former Governor of Rivers State, Nyesom Wike, addressed the public and clarified his previously controversial statements, which had been directed toward certain governors of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). Wike, known for his assertive political stance, had earlier declared that he would "put fire" in the states of any PDP governors who interfered with his control of the party’s structure in Rivers State. However, this comment sparked concerns and widespread debate about the possible implications.
Clarification of the "Fire" Remark
Speaking on Channels TV, Wike explained that his use of the word "fire" had been misinterpreted. According to him, the statement was never meant to suggest physical harm or acts of violence against any state. Instead, Wike emphasized that his words were metaphorical, referring to his capacity to create political turbulence in any state where governors attempt to undermine his political influence.
Wike was keen to clear the air, particularly regarding the states of Oyo and Bauchi, which had been mentioned in earlier discussions. He firmly stated that his comments were not meant as threats to burn down these states or incite physical crises.
"I Can Cause Political Crises, Not Physical Harm"
Wike elaborated on his original point during the interview, stating, "Who told you I don’t have the capacity to say that there will be crises in your state if you try to cause problems in Rivers? I am not talking about going to Bauchi to burn Bauchi, or going to Oyo to burn Oyo."
By this, Wike clarified that his comment about causing crises in other states was solely in the political realm. He believes that if another governor tries to interfere in Rivers State’s political affairs, he could retaliate in kind by creating political instability in that governor's state. However, he stressed that such a reaction would not involve physical harm or destruction.
Reaffirming Political Control
Wike's clarification appears to be a reaffirmation of his long-standing position regarding his control of the PDP structure in Rivers State. The former governor has always been vocal about maintaining control of the party's activities and operations in the state, particularly against external interference from other political figures within the PDP.
This latest development highlights Wike’s protective stance over Rivers State’s political sovereignty, asserting that he will not tolerate attempts by other PDP governors to destabilize his stronghold in the state. The notion of "fire" in his comments, therefore, was meant to signal his determination to safeguard his political influence against any external threats.
Political Turbulence Within the PDP
Wike’s comments reflect the ongoing power dynamics within the PDP, where governors often seek to exert influence beyond their own states. Political rivalries and competition for control of party structures are common, especially among prominent figures like Wike, who have built strong political legacies in their respective regions.
As Wike clarified his stance, it became evident that his remarks were part of a larger narrative about political strategy rather than physical violence. His comments underscore the intensity of political jockeying within the PDP, where internal disputes can lead to significant political maneuvering across state lines.
Conclusion: A Call for Understanding
In closing, Wike called for a better understanding of his remarks, urging the public to recognize that his words were taken out of context. His intention was never to physically harm any state but rather to highlight his ability to resist interference in his state’s affairs. He made it clear that his commitment to the political future of Rivers State remains unshaken, and any attempt to undermine it would be met with a firm political response.
Wike’s clarification comes at a time when political tensions remain high, and it serves as a reminder that words spoken by political figures can often be misconstrued. However, his explanation provides a clearer picture of his intentions, ensuring that his remarks are not misinterpreted as incitement to violence.
0 Comments