Opinion
Celebration Of Our Nationhood: Matters Arising
Nigeria became a country divided into two Protectorates in 1900 A.D. The persistent dichotomy between the North and Southern Nigeria thus started in the year 1900 AD.
In 1914, the inherently divided nation of North and Southern Protectorates were amalgamated by Lord Frederick Lugard. Political commentators have come to see this development as the bringing together of two strange bed fellows. The socio-economic discomfort in this arrangement began to manifest and haunt the nation at birth.
At Independence in 1960, after several experiments at constitutional development, it was expected that Nigeria would have enough structural simulation that would make it a great country.
The independent Nigeria was structured into a Republic in 1963. Thus severing the country from the apron strings attached to the British monarchy.
Prior to the Republican Constitution, the Queen of England was still the ceremonial Head of State, represented by the Governor General, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe.
This was the final stage of gaining nationhood. The nation had already been structured into three regions of North, West and Eastern Nigeria, plus the Mid West which was part of the Western Region.
Indeed, Nigeria stood on a Tripod of North, dominated by Hausa Fulani, West, the Yoruba and the Eastern Region dominated by Igbo. Ethnic minorities were only heard but not seen. Nigeria was thus a divided country along ethnic lines. The three major political parties were also along ethnic lines. Action Group was a Western Nigerian Party, Northern people’s Congress was indeed a Northern Hausa-Fulani political rallying point, while N. C. N. C which was supposed to be a national party was an Eastern Nigeria Igbo political party.
It was indeed sad that every group only struggled to grab power for the benefit of their region and not for the country. The Coup of January 15, 1966 was therefore not a surprise as the nation had begun to show signs of collapse from the 1964 elections crisis.
The electoral violence in the Western Region became the sign post of a country going off the cliff.
Earlier, the young nation had become mature in different ills such as corruption, nepotism, ethnic and religious bigotry as well as electoral fraud . There was negative growth in socio-political life of the nation. The positives however were in the area of Agriculture and revenue sharing formula, where states benefited from their natural resources. Many proponents of resource control would love to go back to that era.
The military struck in January 15, 1966 to halt the derailment of the new nation.
One would have thought that the jackboot dispensation would bring sanity, unfortunately, it plunged the nation into a Civil War that lasted for 30 months.
The reunification of Nigeria in 1970 did not usher in a democratic dispensation until 1979. The fragile civil rule was again truncated in 1983.
Finally in 1999, a democratically elected Government came on stream to begin a new vista of hope for national development in a democratic environment. In every independence celebration in Nigeria, there is always a question on whether there is anything to celebrate in Nigeria after many years of independence.
This question on whether Nigerians have anything to celebrate is indeed a rhetorical question.
This year has brought forth the same question and many Nigerians have their answers up their sleeves, positive and negative. I see it as a rhetorical question with an open ended response. Why would a citizen of a nation that has a geographical definition under government not celebrate something.
Some citizens of the world in parts of North Africa and the Northern fringes of West Africa are stateless. They do not belong to any national authority, they wander from place to place posing security threats to independent nations.
Nigerians today have a country to call their own, with freedom to elect or select their leaders and participate in international affairs under a flag.
However, Nigeria is getting more and more divided over the years. There is a new line of division which has created two kinds of citizens. One is a nation of citizens which are referred to as NAIJA. NAIJA citizens are new generation of creative and innovative Nigerians.
NAIJA citizens are the Nollywood stars, the new musical Icons and the ICT innovative citizens who live in and outside Nigeria. These ones are the creative Nigerians that have brought respect and honour to the country.
They do their own thing and with them, Nigerians have become more resilient in overcoming economic hardship. These citizens are serial entrepreneurs who have or are pulling themselves out of poverty with or without government inputs. They are the future of this nation. The NAIJA people are cool, innovative and resilient. They are the ones with the Nigerian spirit. On the flip side, we have Nigerians, the old school, the political class, the formal business class, the traditional institutions and political parties as well as the organised labour.
These Nigerians are the ones that have failed to up the ante in national development. Old school Nigerians are the ones that have turned the nation into the poverty capital of the world. They are the ones that created divisions along parochial ethnic lines that have brought about secessionist calls across the country. President Buhari in his broadcast to the nation expressed the unwavering resolve of his administration to unite the country. This was the high point of his broadcast because the nation is drifting and may plunge into separate nation if nothing is done to hold it together.
By: Bon Woke
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