Opinion
Dealing With Controversial DPRK
North Korea successfully launched an intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) recently. The missile is proficient and can transmit a nuclear warhead that can sail at least 5,000 miles in distance.
The ICBM test is the latest in a series of galling acts by North Korea and the most momentous development in the regime’s nuclear programme in many years.
It additionally crosses a precarious threshold. The international community has long been apprehensive about North Korea’s nuclear programme, but until now the regime has failed to validate the ability to deploy a missile beyond their territory.
The missile launched recently shows that North Korea, also known as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), can at least haul a rocket capable of reaching the United States of America (USA).
The development is enough to make one perturbed. The question is, what does North Korea’s ICBM missile presuppose? Let’s assume we can do nothing to curb the regime’s plans; but what are USA’s current missile defence capabilities?
I am distraught that North Korea has resolved to go ahead to develop portentous weapons that are prohibited by the United Nations because of their high threat quotient to international peace and security.
If the aspiration of the communist nation to develop nuclear weapons is not obviated, it may put across two severe consequences.
The first one is, it may restore nuclear arms race in the region and globally. That may be coming at a time the world is striving to curb nuclear proliferations.
The next ramification is the threat it constitutes to the Korean Peninsula, and perhaps the entire region as well.
Viewed from global vista, the homogeneous defiance by the DPRK with no visible sanctions, may indicate that the idea of mutual security upon which the UN is founded may be gratuitous.
Unfortunately, the sanctions regimen the UN placed on the country looks more like an incentive than a deterrence. The result is that within the last few months, DPRK has tested prohibited projectiles about ten times. The recent successful ICBM test is the 11th.
The country may have eventually succeeded in building and testing its imaginary weapon, the ICBM, in realisation of its ambition to be able to target and hit the US which it regards as ‘sworn enemy’ of the North Korean people.
It is imperative to recognise that the North Korean imbroglio was an invention of the Second World War. When the war ended, two Allied powers (Russia and the United States) controlled the Korean Peninsula. While Russia got the North, the US grabbed the South.
Soon, Russia and the US fell out over ideological variations which led to the Cold War. The war affected the peninsula to the extent that both the North and the South took to the contrasting ways of their ‘colonial masters’.
Subsequently, the North invaded the South, leading to what is known as the Korean War of 1950-53. Since then, both sides have been at war technically till date.
The South prospered enormously while the North was floundered in arms build-up, economic misery and cult hero-worship. But from every indication, it seems the Americans have found themselves in a quandary where their military might has been impotent in compelling a relatively weak North Korea to do their bidding.
Given his compulsive thought on nuclear weapons, it is apparent that the North Korean leader, President Kim Jong Un, is a homicidal maniac who could hazard a first nuclear strike unless he is stopped by preemption.
The DPRK question has dawdled. I think the US and the world require a new approach to the threat from the Korean Peninsula, and the most useful means is direct negotiation resulting in a peace treaty.
Again, such treaty should include the unification of the North and South Korea. If Vietnam and Germany could unite after substantial years in dissolution, I believe it is attainable.
Arnold Alalibo
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo
-
Oil & Energy4 days agoHysteria Clashes with Missing Oil Barrels
-
Rivers4 days ago
Shippers Council moves To Enhance Service Delivery At Nigerian Ports
-
Editorial4 days agoStrike: Heeding ASUU’s Demands
-
Oil & Energy4 days agoOil Theft: Economic Council Urges NNPC To Strengthen Security In Creeks
-
News4 days agoAir Peace Begins Direct Flight From Abuja To London
-
Business4 days agoNigeria Exits FATF Grey List For Global Financial Crime ………..NFIU
-
Nation4 days agoCommunity Health Practitioners Marks 2025 Week
-
Sports4 days agoFBN, C’River gov partner to boost tourism