IN what was termed by international and national observers “free and fair elections”, Goodluck Jonathan received a national mandate from the people of Nigeria. His responsibility, therefore, is to the nation, not to the personal, ethnic, religious or regional followers who lay claim to him. His task is made easier by the fact that his party, which has a reputation for corruption and incompetence, did poorly, relative to his own performance in the presidential poll.

Jonathan would do well to distance himself from the old guard – the corrupt, megalomaniac, morally degenerate cabal which was rejected by the electorate all over the country. He must concentrate on the needs of his nation, which are obvious to everyone but the leadership which steered the country to the edge of destruction over the past three decades: these needs are employment, education, power, water, agriculture, manufacturing, stability, and other functions of a modern state.

Under the leadership of Attahiru Jega, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has allowed the voters to express their preferences, and they have done so, getting rid of several governors, scores of senators and hundreds of members of the House of Representatives. Sacred cows have been humiliated, even if they are too shameless and thick-skinned to admit it. The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) won by default, because the other parties did not satisfy the electorate that they could perform any better.

Jonathan and his party have four years to put things right. If by 2015 there are no new oil refineries, power stations, factories, schools, roads, railways, and other needed infrastructure, political power will be up for grabs. If the president goes back on his pledge not to seek a second term, he will set off forces that could destroy his party and personal power base. If he retires in 2015, the electorate will make extreme demands on whoever seeks to replace him.

In 2015 the Opposition parties will therefore have their best chance to mount a challenge to the entrenchment of the PDP as the ruling party. Like the Action Group, the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) has the most competent and progressive leadership in the country, but like the Action Group it is a regional party, without the capacity to spread beyond its borders. Its governors in Lagos and Ekiti approach administration with the tools necessary for modern statecraft. Lagos remains the only state capable of surviving without federal subsidies, and its governor seems to be reducing the chaos associated with a congested city with limited infrastructure.

But while the sanitisation of INEC has allowed the ACN electorate to remove the unpopular, corrupt and incompetent leadership of the PDP, the party was incapable of fielding a credible candidate for president. Its attempt to form a coalition with the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) was unsuccessful, and no one can tell if a coalition between two such parties was even possible. In the presidential elections the ACN candidate did poorly, and most of the electorate from its region did not vote for him.

The CPC did relatively well in the presidential poll but poorly in all others. And its relatively good showing in the vote for president was marred by the hundreds killed, thousands injured, tens of thousands displaced, and billions of naira damage caused in the aftermath. This was compounded by the confused, ambiguous, and sometimes crass responses of the leadership of the party. Where loss of human life is concerned, emphasis on claims of “cheating” is certainly not good politics.

The All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) was built on the personality of its leader, the retired General Buhari, who ruled the country between 1981 and 1983. When he lost the leadership of this party, he set up the CPC, which also rested on his legend as a disciplined and uncorrupt leader. But while he blamed cheating for his loss in 2003, 2007, and 2011, he never confronted the other factors responsible for his failure. INEC was corrupt in 2003 and 2007, but there is no evidence that he would have won if it was not.

Observers praised the conduct of INEC in 2011, and many of the electorate voted for Jonathan, because he chose as chairman Professor Jega, a man noted for integrity, intelligence and administrative skill. Whatever corrupt practices occurred in INEC was done despite Jega’s efforts, and all parties, including the CPC, were responsible for rigging. The use of National Youth Service Corps members was meant to reduce the corruption of the entrenched bureaucracy in INEC.

The targeting of these young people by the CPC is therefore not just criminal and inhumane, but stupid. The failures of the Action Group, ACN, and CPC in national elections were due in large part to their associations with ethnic, regional, personality and other primordial interests. The CPC will hardly enhance its national credentials by targeting non-Northerners, Christians, non-Hausa-Fulani, or anti-CPC Hausa-Fulani Moslems for attack.

Buhari has a significant proportion of enemies in the region he considers his power base, and this was made clear by the fact that his party won a single governorship in Nassarawa, where the PDP candidate was so unpopular he could have been defeated by a domestic animal. These enemies would have been increased by attacks on traditional authorities, PDP and ANPP leaders in the North. Buhari has had thirty years to convince Nigerians he was worthy of leading them, and failed.

The irony is that the people who supported him most fanatically are the most deprived, alienated, illiterate, unemployed, and desperate in the country. If Jonathan fails to satisfy the aspirations of these unfortunates, who saw Buhari as their Redeemer, a leader far worse than the General could emerge in 2015. The ball is in your court, Mr President.

Patrick Wilmot, who is based in London, is a writer and commentator on African affairs for the BBC, Sky News, Al-Jazeera and CNN. He’s a visiting professor at Ahmadu Bello and Jos universities in Nigeria.