Opinion
Managing Poverty: Nigerian Style
Scotland-Yard security instructors would always remind students who pass through them that three critical sources of social instability and changes are: explosions in human population, aspirations and knowledge. Consequently there are bound to be scrambles for survival, in the process of which divisions and inequalities among humans would surely arise. Expectedly poverty would be a common feature in every society, even though this would be in relative terms. Also, poverty goes beyond lack of money and material necessities, but includes inferiority in integrity, ability and perception.
It is quite instructive to observe the ways and styles in which the Nigerian nation manages the issue of poverty, ranging from the distribution of national and natural resources, to the management of palliative and relief aids and materials. From the handling of COVID-19 Pandemic palliative measures, to current experiences in the dispensing of succour to cushion the sad effects of removal of subsidy on petroleum, the style and strategy are the same. Humans learn from every experience and the more traumatic the experiences the more far-reaching the knowledge acquired.
With a rapidly expanding human population, coupled with faster learning arising from sad experiences, humans would aspire to rise above restricting barriers and hindrances. Explosion in human aspirations would include not only trying to cope with threats to life, but striving to rise above such threats. Money being such a good soldier, capable of being deployed in every battle, means of acquisition of money would be the lines of aspiration of an individual. Who would want to remain a beggar while others own private universities, airlines and build 5-star hotels in every state?
Those who manage crimes and security issues would suggest that revenge motives feature in many acts of social insecurity. Fear of being left in the lurch and the humiliation of being regarded as a failure, drive many people into acts of desperation, which can include crimes. Crime rate builds up and becomes more vicious and audacious when petty crimes are punished with venom and serious ones get resolved through plea bargaining. In the case of oil theft, for example, are petty bunkerers the real barons and kings? They rarely know where the oil flows!
Social services as remedial measures to balance social imbalances; emphases are not placed on maintaining the status quo, but on current social challenges arising from unavoidable changes. Factors which bring pressures on the society include the explosions in population, aspirations and knowledge. One aspect of knowledge explosion does not arise from book learning, but internet culture, of which smart phone is a symbol. Nigerian leaders would hardly believe the volume of information available to the masses, via internet resources. One of such information is hypocrisy in high places wearing masks.
Abraham Maslow’s postulations that humans are motivated by certain basic needs, were balanced by Erikson’s “Eight Ages of Man”, with desires to resolve major issues at each developmental level. Therefore, governance as a social contract, requires understanding peoples’ psychological situations and humans as bio-psycho-social creatures who aspire and learn fast. Thus, the ability to intervene in people’s lives and situations must be constructive and honest, if mass confidence must be sustained. Promises of palliatives must not create value conflicts arising from class, political or ethnic differences. Biting need counts!
Whatever the circumstances that brought about abuses in fuel subsidy project, thus resulting in the removal of such subsidy, the helpless masses should not be the major bearers of the burdens. The practice of transfer of guilt makes the shenanigans of fuel subsidy removal and the attendant palliative regime more bitter and burdensome for the masses. When the distribution of palliative measures takes the form of sharing of loots, then the principle of justice comes to question. “All human beings, because they belong to the category of being human, must be treated in the same way”, so says the principle of justice.
There is also the Concrete Principle of justice which demands that the allocation of resources by government must give priority to meeting basic human needs, with food, clothing and shelter coming first. Fairness, justice and accountability in the allocation of palliative succour count as the measure of integrity and responsibility. Basic professional principle in social services delivery as defined by McSweeny, demands “fairness” especially as it relates to the possession and/or acquisition of the resources based on some kind of valid claim to a share of these resources.
In the past administration, colossal sums of money purportedly spent on feeding of school children were seen by a large section of Nigerians as empty claims, to say the least. Similar sly claims feature in every project of social services delivery, whereby the poorest of the poor who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of such largesse, rarely had anything to show for the claims made. Any effort or clamour to probe into allegations of malfeasance would usually end up like the forensic audit of the affairs of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC). Nigerians are now quite weary of any talk about probity.
With regard to the mounting opposition against the PDP Chairman in Rivers State being the head of a committee to administer subsidy removal palliative succour for Rivers State, grounds for such oppositions are quite germane. To give political or any partisan colouration to any social services delivery project, is to invite cynicism and possible obloquy to the management of such project. Nigerians are quite aware of possible abuses which political partisanship and patronage can bring about, even when no ill motive is intended in appointments of participants.
Basic social problem in poverty alleviation projects has to do largely with mindset, which translates partly into resignation and cynicism or lack of desire or ability in planning one’s life. Poverty is relative and varies with time and place and its causes can be traced to internal or personal factors, and external factors. Depressive mindset and inability in planning one’s life contribute towards poverty, but the structure of a nation’s political economy is a more devastating cause of large-scale poverty. The Nigerian style tends to perpetuate the status quo, whereby a possible means of breaking the poverty jinx is to become a desperado.
Ranging from joining the groups of ballot box snatchers, to engagement in numerous sharp practices involved in the distribution of relief materials and the sharing of loots, many Nigerians became rich and powerful through these and similar malfeasance. As population increases rapidly, and as scrambles for available resources become fiercer, aspirations of individuals rise higher, with knowledge towards making a headway in life advancing rapidly. Thus wealth grows, but men and integrity decay. What are the roles of the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation?
By: Bright Amirize
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.
Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.
The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.
It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.
Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.
On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.
It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.
*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.
In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.
Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.
One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.
Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.
The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.
The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.
Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.
The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.
The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.
Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.
If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?
As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.
Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.
Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.
Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.
We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.
The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.
It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.
No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.
By; King Onunwor
