Between Reconciliation and Political Myth-Making: A Rejoinder to the Blueprint Narrative on Governor Alia and Senator Akume -By Leonard Karshima Shilgba

The recent Blueprint report titled “Alia’s apology to APC stakeholders, Akume amidst Benue reconciliation moves” deserves careful scrutiny, not because reconciliation is undesirable, but because journalism must not descend into political myth-making, emotional propaganda, or the manufacturing of narratives designed to psychologically subordinate one political tendency before another.

No reasonable Benue person is opposed to peace within the APC or cooperation among leaders in the interest of governance and stability. Indeed, political maturity demands dialogue, reconciliation, and accommodation where necessary. However, reconciliation should not become an opportunity for political embellishment, historical revisionism, or the public construction of exaggerated narratives aimed at diminishing one actor while canonizing another.

The Blueprint report raises serious questions of credibility, proportionality, and possible political scripting.

First, while there is evidence that Governor Hyacinth Alia participated in reconciliation efforts and made conciliatory remarks during the APC peace meeting that held on Sunday, May 3, 2026 at Government House, Makurdi, the article goes much further by presenting a highly dramatized and emotionally choreographed account without offering verifiable transcripts, video evidence, or direct recordings of many of the sweeping statements attributed to the governor.

Phrases such as:

• “tears of joy,”
• “overbearing actions,”
• “misconceptions about Akume,”
• “maturity and wisdom rather than weakness,”
• and repeated glorification of Senator George Akume as the singular architect of Benue political destiny,

read less like objective reporting and more like political image laundering carefully packaged for strategic consumption and published on May 20, 2026, on the of sensitive APC gubernatorial primaries political processes.

A serious newspaper ought to distinguish between verified quotations and narrative embroidery.

Second, the timing of the publication naturally invites suspicion. Why did such an emotionally loaded account emerge only hours before APC gubernatorial primaries and ongoing political calculations within the party structure? In politics, timing is rarely accidental. Media narratives are often deployed to create impressions of surrender, dominance, endorsement, or political inevitability.

This is why discerning readers must separate actual reconciliation from theatrical political storytelling.

Third, the article subtly attempts to reduce Governor Alia from a democratically elected governor with an independent political mandate into the image of a repentant political subordinate seeking validation from an elder political establishment figure. That framing is both unnecessary and politically manipulative.

Respect for Senator George Akume’s contributions to Benue politics should not require the ritual humiliation or symbolic diminishment of a sitting governor elected overwhelmingly by the people of Benue State.

Democracy is not monarchy.

No political leader in a democracy should be presented as the sole gatekeeper of legitimacy, political relevance, or leadership destiny in a state as intellectually rich and politically conscious as Benue.

Fourth, the article suffers from selective historical memory. If there were indeed misunderstandings, tensions, and public disagreements between the governor and some party stakeholders, responsibility cannot honestly be assigned to one side alone. Political conflicts are rarely unilateral. Yet the report carefully frames one actor as wise, patient, mature, and magnanimous while portraying the other as misguided, emotional, and overbearing until “rescued” through reconciliation.

Such one-sided moral framing betrays journalistic imbalance.

Fifth, the repeated invocation of emotional language appears designed to psychologically condition readers into accepting a narrative of complete political capitulation. But reconciliation in politics is not equivalent to surrender. Mature political actors often negotiate, compromise, and temporarily align for broader strategic reasons without abandoning their convictions, mandates, or constituencies.

Indeed, subsequent disagreements reportedly emerging immediately even after the reconciliation meeting indicate that the political realities remain more complex than the simplistic “peace restored” narrative suggests.

Ultimately, Benue people deserve responsible journalism, not political theatre disguised as news reporting.

The task of the media is not to manufacture saints and sinners within political contests, nor to emotionally stampede the public into predetermined interpretations. Its duty is to inform with accuracy, balance, context, and restraint.

Reconciliation should be encouraged where genuine. Peace within political parties is desirable. Cooperation for governance is necessary. But political peace loses credibility when accompanied by orchestrated narratives that appear more interested in image construction than objective truth.

Benue people are politically mature enough to recognize the difference between authentic reconciliation and strategic public relations choreography.