TheNewsGuru

Tag: Dakuku Peterside

  • Economy: African leaders under AU must quickly activate Continental Free Trade Area – Dakuku Peterside

    Economy: African leaders under AU must quickly activate Continental Free Trade Area – Dakuku Peterside

    The immediate past DG/CEO of Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) Dr Dakuku Peterside, has said sustainable development of the African maritime sector is crucial to unlocking the potentials of the continent and making it a huge contributor to the world economy.

    Peterside at the Agenda For African Development Senior Managers Forum on Environmental Management System in African Seaports at the Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport in Alexandria, Egypt said for the maritime industry to play its role as facilitator of growth in the continent, there is the need to fast track its development and sustainability.

    In a statement issued by his Media Media Team in Wednesday noted that Participants were drawn from 15 African countries, with funding from the Egyptian Agency of Partnership for Development (EAPD).

    Revealing statistics that Africa accounts for less than 3% of global trade and just about 15% intra-African trade compared to Europe (68%), Asia (58%), North America (48%), and Latin America (20%), he argued that African leaders under the auspices of Africa Union (AU) must quickly activate the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) aimed at boosting intra African trade.

    He noted that with the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) estimating that AfCFTA could boost intra African trade by up to 33% and cut trade deficit by 51%, time was of essence in promoting trade.

    According to him, “This increase in trade will lead to higher demand for maritime transport, create new market opportunities and spur investment in port infrastructure.”

    While stressing that the maritime sector will play a key role, he argued that it would involve tackling issues such as strengthening governance, improving infrastructure, investment in human capital, and improving the operating environment.

    Peterside revealed that developing a sustainable African maritime industry entails concise policy and sustained commitment to implementation, governance structure, robust monitoring and enforcement regime, conducive operating environment, investment in technology, digitalization, automation and innovation, among others.

    “Achieving a sustainable African maritime industry requires a holistic approach and long-term commitment from governments, industry leaders, and society at large.

    “It is a complex challenge but with collective effort and innovative solutions, such as an articulated road map, effective governance structure, digitalization, decarbonization, sustainable energy, environmental sustainability and international partnership; it is possible to minimize the negative impacts of maritime activities on the environment while fostering economic growth. These keys are interconnected and must be pursued collectively to unlock the full potential of a sustainable African maritime sector.”

    Dr Peterside will, in October, be the guest of the Government of Tanzania.

  • Strong abroad, weak at home? – By Dakuku Peterside

    Strong abroad, weak at home? – By Dakuku Peterside

    President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima, in their first 100 days in office, hold the record of the most travelled presidency since 1999. The President’s first trip abroad was to France to participate in the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact. Next was attending the ECOWAS summit in Guinea Bissau, then the AU meeting in Kenya and the G-20 Summit in India quickly followed. His biggest on the global stage is the UN General Assembly (UNGA) last week in New York. These exclude stopover in Benin Republic, London and the UAE. Vice President Kashim Shettima, on his part, has represented the President in Italy, Russia and at the G77 Summit in Cuba.

    Some diplomacy scholars have described the President’s diplomatic shuttle as regenerating economic growth through foreign policy. A common theme in the President’s many foreign trips is the search for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), re-establishing Nigeria as the premium economic powerhouse in Africa and situating her regional leadership status across the sub-Saharan region.

    Historically, this would not be Nigeria’s first attempt to weave her foreign policy around economic diplomacy. General Ike Nwachukwu, as IBB’s Foreign Minister, introduced economic diplomacy as a conscious policy. It simply meant that Nigeria’s economic interests would guide her external affairs. That interest emphasized Afrocentric self-reliance.

    The success or failure of the current economic diplomacy is left for political economists to decipher. However, this new government is wittingly or unwittingly being bullish internationally and weaving Nigeria’s socio-economic renaissance on her regional relevance and soft power in dealing with subregional problems like the coups in the West African region and beyond. It is also a collaboration with global powers and global private capital to direct investments to Nigeria. The President is eager to show the world that Nigeria is ready and open for business and the new government is a significant driver in facilitating and enabling such businesses.

    Nigerians are divided about the value of these global engagements and diplomatic shuttles. Two schools of thought have emerged. First, those who believe our economic growth can only be strengthened by solid external relations. Especially one that prioritizes attracting foreign capital to build up our capital base. The second school believes that the frequency of travel is unacceptable as economic diplomacy as the mainstay of our economic plans is short-sighted. This school believe the country should tackle foundational issues such as insecurity, decrepit infrastructure, poor governance and inefficient institutions before inviting foreign investors.

    Both schools have some merit in their arguments. A critical review of these two schools reveals they are not as dichotomous and polarized as they may seem at first. They are part of a two-pod solution to the economic regeneration of Nigeria. A comprehensive economic plan that combines economic diplomacy’s merits, revitalizes domestic structural and economic systems by tackling fundamental local problems is needed and must be implemented efficiently. There is no chicken-and-egg situation here. One must not do one before the other sequentially. Instead, economic diplomacy can be woven together with domestic improvements so that both work together and reify each other to produce more remarkable results. I advocate a multi-prong approach to bringing about growth in Nigeria. However, we must synchronize these approaches so they are not counterproductive. Thus far, it is established that Nigeria, under President Tinubu, intentionally or unintentionally, is changing the focus of her foreign policy to an economic growth-led policy. Therefore, the government must match its extensive travels with articulating an overarching economic agenda showing a direction. Only such an agenda can drive this new economy-centric foreign policy regime.

    The second established issue is the need to address institutional, infrastructural and socio-economic barriers that can stop us from realizing the benefits of economic diplomacy. Indeed, the obstacles are mountainous. The recent disruptions in the domestic economy need to be fixed quickly with a balance of structural economic innovation and social responsibility at home. Human behaviour drives the economy. Our perception shapes our actions and inactions. Therefore, this government must quickly work to change the current dominant perception of a collapsing economy to that of a growing one. This will improve confidence in the system and provide the backbone for growth.

    The message of economic reform must showcase something new on offer from Nigeria. Otherwise, we will have only executive air miles to show at the end. Global capital goes where there are clear opportunities that are unencumbered. These opportunities must exist in a context of manageable risk and good returns on investment. The Tinubu Administration is gradually providing the enabling environment for FDI when it pledged to allow companies to repatriate revenue through an open and robust exchange system. We advocate that despite the temporary pain of these economic reforms, the government must sanitize the system and make it fit for purpose to attract investments both locally and abroad.

    The phrase “strong abroad, weak at home” typifies the common sentiment expressed by observers of Nigerian politics and governance. It reflects the perception that Nigeria tends to perform better internationally than it does in addressing her domestic challenges. This perception creates bias immediately. When Nigerians feel that a government is bullish internationally, the assumption is that the government will neglect domestic needs. Nigeria faces numerous domestic challenges. These challenges include political instability, corruption, inadequate infrastructure, a struggling healthcare system, a poorly performing education system, high poverty levels, unemployment and insecurity. These issues have hindered the country’s socio-economic development and the well-being of citizens. The government must prioritise these issues as Nigeria strives to convince the world to come and do business with us.

    Furthermore, this Nigerian leadership must address the perceived hypocrisy of Nigerian leaders. What we say to foreign investors differs from what we do at home. The policy environment (fiscal/monetary) could be more stable yet often out of sync with global best practices. The Nigerian factor makes most policies difficult to implement and impunity reigns supreme. The integrity of actors, actions and processes is sine qua non with the trust deficit inherent in the Nigerian business environment. This we must urgently address and Nigeria’s leadership must imbibe and exemplify this.

    We must never forget that nothing is permanent. Our regional and continental position is often under threat. Knowingly or unknowingly, in our quest to attract FDI we are in competition with other emerging political and economic powerhouses in the sub-region and continent. Therefore, we must strive to maintain our dominance and influence by strengthening our political base and growing our economy.

    Our leadership on the continent and beyond Africa is non-negotiable. We often play a significant role in international organisations such as the United Nations, African Union and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). We contribute troops to peace-keeping missions and participate in global diplomatic efforts. We are proponents and defenders of freedom and democracy on the continent. We are pan-African and lead in initiatives such as the African Continental Free Trade Area (AFCTFAA). Our diaspora is also known for their lofty accomplishments in fields including medicine, technology, and business. We must maintain and build on these strengths.

    The government must rejig the system to improve institutional efficiency and close the governance gap. It should conduct reforms on ease of doing business, administration of justice, protection of local industries, taxation and ease of capital repatriation. The government must not be seen talking the talk and not working the work. We should remember that the worst thing that can be done to a wrong product is to advertise it. You will inadvertently kill the product. We must put our house in order and present value and clear opportunities to the world to do business with us. Nigerian challenges are complex. Opinions also vary on the extent to which Nigeria is strong abroad but weak at home. Some argue that Nigeria’s international role does not necessarily translate to concrete benefits for her citizens. Others believe that the country’s international engagements are essential for her global influence and economic well-being. However, only an alignment between our homegrown economic agenda, structural reforms and foreign policy can provide a message of economic renaissance that the Administration carries on its extensive foreign travels. A travelling salesperson must carefully brand and package his wares.

  • Accountability deficit and the transparency question – By Dakuku Peterside

    Accountability deficit and the transparency question – By Dakuku Peterside

    In August 2023, the federal, state, and local governments shared 1.26 trillion Naira from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), the highest in our history. In July, they shared N966 billion, and from June till date, FAAC has distributed almost 3 trillion Naira. By Nigerian standards, this can be described as jumbo allocations. Compared to many West African states’ revenue, the allocation to many states surpasses their annual budget. Can these jumbo allocations translate to concrete developments devoid of transactions for personal benefit? How can citizens ensure a higher level of fiscal and financial discipline, responsibility, and accountability? Knowing that the problem of monstrous bad governance is real and present at the state and LGA levels, how do citizens hold state and LGA chief executives to account for these resources?

    There are two broad areas in which public accountability at the level of state governments is concerned. The first and most apparent assumption is that the completion of some infrastructure projects necessarily ‘accounts’ for funds budgeted for capital expenditure. Accordingly, governors go ahead to build flyovers, roads that lead to no economic destinations and other structures. It becomes challenging for a mesmerised public to question the governor’s accountability as he becomes the ‘action governor’. Yet these ceremonial commissions say little about the accountability issues involved. The public cannot know the actual costs, how much borrowing supports the projects, or how much funds were misappropriated.

    The second aspect concerns the development of public accountability as integral to democratic culture. In a proper democracy, public officers are responsible for accounting to the public through regular periodic audits. They also have an ethical responsibility to account for their private life expenditure as a function of their statutory income. In the US, public officers are barred from receiving favours from private interests, either cash or kind above $20. Our States are far from this type of transparency and accountability.

    We may be deceiving ourselves if we think that physical resource increase will automatically translate to increased public goods and services by the various states and local governments. History does not support this thinking. We have seen the contrary, where more resources translate to more opportunities for squandering resources with impunity. This sudden revenue flow can create a significant appetite for corruption or mismanagement without institutional control and checks. Some of our elected leaders are ill-equipped to handle this kind of fund. Lacking vision, experience, and managerial capacity, the tendency to channel the resources to things that do not serve the public interest is high.

    The matter is even worse due to the lack of robust public scrutiny and surveillance of state resources. The existing public trust and intelligence infrastructure seem inadequate for such scrutiny, or they have been encumbered by legalistic and mundane practices that make up the Nigerian factor. Our media seem not to be doing enough on this, too. As the watchdog to society, they have looked the other way from holding public servants accountable for managing public resources and instituting transparency in the system.

    Past governments have put a few measures to provide transparency in revenue allocation. Former Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala introduced the publication of details of monthly allocation to states. This practice of publishing FAAC revenue distribution details to the three government tiers has been sustained by subsequent administrations. The aim is to keep Nigerians abreast with the revenue generation and distribution effort of the Federal Government and help them balance government performance with revenue inflows at all levels. This measure is insufficient to curb corruption in the government revenue regime.

    Many extrapolated states and LGAs will publish details of all they receive monthly and their expenditure profile by now. But that is not the case. State revenue and expenditure are still shrouded in secrecy. Only 10 of 36 states have their detailed budget on their website, another measure of transparency. None has its budget performance report on the state website. Less than 20 states publish their audited annual financial statements. To publish monthly financial inflows and outflows is wishful thinking at the state level. The infrastructure and framework for transparency and accountability are just not there.

    The second measure implemented by the last administration is the Treasury Single Account. The government brought in this system to harmonise the revenue and payment system. Sadly, only about 20 of 36 states operate the whole bouquet of Treasury Single Account (TSA), meaning others are averse to financial accounting reforms. Some analysts also think implementing the TSA should be followed by the passage of a “Fiscal Sunshine Bill”, which will open up the government’s financial activities in the budgetary process and its implementation. There have also been calls for solid legal sanctions where money is being spent outside its appropriated purpose.

    The rot of fiscal and financial abuse in the system runs deep. This is a different time for business than usual. We must challenge the status quo and fight for a new financial accountability and transparency regime. I will advocate for a renewed zeal by state and LGA chief executives to be transparent and accountable. It is not enough to profess to encourage public participation and accountability, which to the average officeholder is a PR stunt, but matching words with actions is more critical. Notably, most public officeholders today loathe accounting for public resources or even their decisions. This is anathema to growth and development.

    We need to strengthen the existing infrastructure of accountability and transparency in the state. The quality of most state legislature could be better. This is because the executive arm has hijacked the state legislature. Most legislators at the state level are handpicked, and often, they do the bidding of the state’s chief executive. The annual budget is a mere ritual, and the state legislature’s oversight functions are almost non-existent in most cases. Virtually all the state institutions are weak and seem fascicle in the face of the mighty chief executives who bestrides the states like a colossus without accountability. The state of the state judiciary leaves much to the imagination.

    The phenomena of state capture by godfathers and “polititractors” is prevalent and a new elephant in the room. Budgets, project selection and initiation, contractors, approvals, and payments are all made outside the routine government processes. Some chief executives are more symbols of power than a source of authority, more like furniture in the state house. The chief accounting  officer in the state is only accountable to his godfather and no one else. How can there be transparency and accountability when chief executive officers are mere puppets in the hands of selfish, self-centred puppeteers who see the states as their extended estates for plundering?

    Elections which citizens could use to punish lousy behaviour are few and far between, and even when they occur, there is no guarantee that chief executives with bad records of transparency and accountability will be voted out. Our electoral system is still maturing, and we hope it comes to a point when state leaders will fear losing the election because they cannot stand public scrutiny and demand for accountability. However, there is a need to construct other forms of continuous enforcement of accountability by which the elected and appointed government officials can be held accountable or even punished for abuse of office.

    While there is a growing awareness of the need for accountability, civic engagement and participation in governance processes remain relatively low in many Nigerian states. Citizens are not fully engaged in demanding accountability from their elected representatives. A panoply of reasons suffices for this anomaly.

    First, some citizens have become disgruntled and disenchanted with the political system and have lost hope. An average Nigerian believes that corruption is still deeply rooted in our system, so the possibility that their commonwealth will be fretted away is real. It is unreal how it has become normal that citizens have given up fighting for accountability.

    The second is the structural lacuna in our constitution that has made it impossible for citizens to hold their leaders accountable for their socio-economic rights. The non-justiciability of Section 6(6)C of the Nigerian constitution makes it difficult for a successful judicial challenge to hold leaders accountable for not providing citizens with their socio-economic rights. In plain language, citizens cannot sue the government for not providing them with socio-economic rights, therefore shielding the leaders from the public challenge of accountability for the state’s resources. This is our albatross!

  • How we de-industrialized Nigeria – By Dakuku Peterside

    How we de-industrialized Nigeria – By Dakuku Peterside

    It is most unlikely that you will visit China and not notice its great industrialisation success. China’s mesmerizing success in creating jobs, lifting 700m people out of extreme poverty, generating overwhelming wealth, improving  living standards and achieved food security for the Chinese people through industrialisation is remarkable. Her speed and precision in industrialisation is a modern-day miracle. China overtook the United States in 2011 to become the world’s largest producer of manufactured goods. Though following different routes, Britain, France, Germany, Japan and the US hitherto achieved global pre-eminence, economic strength and social stability through the same path of industrialization. The 20th century also saw the Asian Tiger countries rapidly industrialize, become manufacturing hub for specific products consumed world over and grew extensive wealth almost in comparison with the West.

    Industrialization has been acknowledged as a critical engine for growth, prosperity, job creation and improved living standards. Yet Africa, Nigeria in particular, is less industrialized today than it was 30 to 40 years ago. Data from the Nigeria Bureau of Statistics (NBS) indicate that the contribution of manufacturing to the country’s GDP keeps declining in the past five years. Meanwhile, manufacturing to GDP ratio is a measure of industrialization. A quick snapshot. In 2018, manufacturing contributed 9.2% to GDP, 9.06% in 2019, 8.99% in 2020, 8.98% in 2021 and declined to 8.92% in 2022. The inability to industrialize is at the root of Africa’s poverty. Nigeria, the giant of Africa, appears left behind, with no plan to industrialize. We seem to be losing every opportunity to make any meaningful progress. Populous, labour-abundant economies globally have all anchored on a manufacturing boom to climb the ladder of economic emancipation. The pertinent questions to ask are: How did China and other industrialized countries get it right? How did Nigeria lose it?

    Let us start by distilling the common denominator among all the industrialized nations. First, much priority is placed on education and technological advancement. Britain focused on  new scientific inventions such as developing the steam engine and using it to the most significant advantage of massive production of goods and movement of people and goods from one part of Europe to another. France focused on technical education, establishing institutions like Ecoles des Arts et Metiers and Ecole Polytechnique. Germany and Japan emphasized  solid engineering, technical and vocational education. The US invested in education that produced technological innovations. China followed this path, achieving 98% literacy with an emphasis on technical and vocational education. Industrialisation anchors on an educated and skilled workforce. How can a country industrialize with a dominant illiterate population? Or as the case is with many African countries, a population of half-baked graduates? People with no vocational and technical skills and an untrainable labour force with little or no interest in technical knowledge and capacity?

    The second factor is that the industrialised countries laid great emphasis on innovation, research and development. From her industrialisation phase to this moment, the US has a strong culture of research and innovation. It developed an intellectual property framework that rewards creativity and innovation. Prominent inventions such as the telegraph, telephone and electric power emerged during the industrialization era. The US has continued to dominate in innovation. The most impactful innovations in recent history are either developed by or promoted more by Americans. From the Internet, robotics, entertainment, social media to Artificial Intelligence, the US has continued to industrialize; moving away from machine-based manufacturing dominance to the intellectual and knowledge-based production of the knowledge economy. Japan invested heavily in Research and Development (R&D) and followed the US in massive industrialization and production of known brands in the consumer market globally. France, in her R & D, focused more on specific industries such as iron, steel, machinery, chemicals and textiles.

    The third common factor is that these countries developed adequate infrastructure and energy to power their industries. Not only did the US and other industrialized countries build massive infrastructure as the foundation for their industrialization and economic growth, they went further to secure the power these industries required to function. It is common knowledge that electric power and other forms of energy (oil, gas, nuclear, solar and clean energy) are harnessed extensively for private and industrial use in those countries. Constant and adequate energy is a sine qua non in the industrialisation process. This is common sense.

    Introductory Physics teaches that energy is neither created nor destroyed and can only be transformed from one form to another. This principle implies that the more energy or power in a place, the more excellent the opportunities to convert it into other states. If materials or products represent condensed energy, it only means that the more power you have, the more you can produce. So, how can any country serious with industrialization and economic development focus on something other than energy creation and sustainability? How can a country power its industries if it does not have enough energy for private and industrial use? Or where it has power, it is unreliable and epileptic?

    Other factors that support growth are right and consistency policies, access to capital, macroeconomic stability anchored on good governance and strong leadership. The Asian Tigers industrialized on the backbone of macroeconomic stability and stable governance .

    A critical analysis of the Nigerian situation shows that we are not meeting these three primary common denominators of industrialisation and are not making any meaningful progress. It is even heart-rending that instead of marching towards industrialization, we are faced with de-industrialization in Nigeria. This refers to the decline or shrinking of the little progress made in the industrial sector of the economy. This process typically involves reducing the share of industrial output and employment in the overall economy. De-industrialization has significant economic and social consequences; been a concern in Nigeria for several decades and has become alarming in recent times. It is an evil wind that blows Nigeria no good.

    Several manufacturing companies have left Nigeria recently. A few more are planning to go. These companies cut across several sectors, including oil and gas, retail industry and pharmaceuticals. A few notable companies sold their assets and left Nigeria. Etisalat, ExxonMobil, Tiger Brands, HSBC, UBS, Mr Price Group Ltd, Shoprite, Game, Brunel Services Plc, Intercontinental Hotel Group, etc have all left. The recent announcement by GSK PLC that it plans to exit Nigeria has sent shock waves to the system. At a time when we desperately need more companies to produce goods and services and provide employment, the few we have are leaving our country. This is very sad!

    The reasons these companies are leaving are many and varied. Some of these companies cited an unfavorable business ecosystem and foreign exchange inconsistency  as the remote and immediate causes of their decision to leave Nigeria. Most companies struggle to get Dollars or other foreign currencies to import goods or machinery. Even after ‘successfully’ doing business in Nigeria, repatriation of proceeds to their home countries is a huge challenge.

    Besides these immediate negative business factors forcing companies to leave and stalling Nigeria’s industrialization, major macro issues are fuelling our de-industrialisation. First, Nigeria’s economy for many years is heavily dependent on oil exports. The discovery of oil in the 1950s and the subsequent boom in the oil sector led to a neglect of other sectors, including manufacturing. As a result, Nigeria’s industrial base was not adequately developed, and the country became overly reliant on oil revenue.

    Second, insufficient investment in infrastructure such as power, transportation and logistics has hindered the growth of the manufacturing sector. Frequent power outages and inadequate transportation networks constitute challenges to operate industries efficiently and competitively. Third, the influx of cheaper foreign products has adversely affected domestic industries, leading to further decline in manufacturing. Some degree of protectionist approach is needed to arrest the last therefore.

    Fourth, many Nigerian industries face challenges accessing affordable financing for expansion and modernisation, thereby hampering ability to invest in new technologies, improve productivity and compete globally. Access to loans for importation is more plausible than securing one for building and developing a manufacturing facility. Fifth, inconsistent government policies discourage investments and make it difficult for industries to plan for the long term. Lastly, insecurity, corruption and lack of skilled labour fosters de-industrialization. Poor economic management at home has deprived local industries of effective demand.

    To address de-industrialization and promote industrial growth, Nigeria needs comprehensive economic reforms to stimulate investments in critical infrastructure; stable and supportive government policies; some degree of creative protectionism to protect local industries; access to affordable capital; and efforts to diversify the economy from the heavy reliance on oil.

    Encouraging the growth of the manufacturing sector is vital for job creation, reducing import dependency and achieving sustainable economic development in the country. The path to industrialisation is not impossible. Other countries with worse conditions than Nigeria’s have walked that path and got it right. All we need is to emulate them. It is only human to study others, learn therefrom and adapt the lessons to fit our peculiar circumstances.

    Nigeria has no option but to industrialize. Production is the key to progress. Local production and consumption of our products as well as supply of goods and services to the rest of the world would address problems caused by poverty and unemployment.

    De-industrialization is an existential crisis and we must do everything possible to stem the tide and usher in massive industrialization. We must critically examine the best ways to industrialize and all hands must be on deck to accomplish this.

  • China’s leadership playbook and Nigeria’s reality – By Dakuku Peterside

    China’s leadership playbook and Nigeria’s reality – By Dakuku Peterside

    Touching down at the bustling Beijing Capital International Airport, you cannot miss that China has again opened to the world after COVID-19 shut down, nor will you miss the pervasive positive spirit and a sense of endless possibilities in the atmosphere. If you have any doubt, a 30-minute drive from the airport to Changping District, North of Beijing, tells the story of a country’s metamorphosis, ancient roots, and what pragmatic leadership can do.

    I am a guest of the Chinese government from the 20th of August till the 2nd of September. It has proven to be a unique opportunity to understand Chinese leadership thinking and the nation’s development trajectory. It has allowed me to do contrastive leadership and political models between China and Nigeria to see if there are vital lessons to be learnt and applied in Nigeria to accelerate our socioeconomic development.

    Although different in many ways, China and Nigeria represent giants in their respective continents (Asia and Africa}. They symbolise the hopes and aspirations of their people in a highly competitive and polarised world dominated for over 500 years by the West. The story of how China got it right and has become the quintessential alternative economic and political power, whilst Nigeria has, at best, remained stagnant over the past decades, is fascinating. No doubt, a multiplicity of factors contributed to this dichotomous and contrasting outcome, which will merit elaborate analysis at an appropriate forum.

    We must delve into their past to understand China’s and Nigeria’s present. First, let us look at China. Chinese civilisation dates to the first Chinese dynasty, Xia, founded in 2070 BC. From the period of this dynasty, through the Middle Han dynasty in the 3rd century to the North Song dynasty of the 10th to 13th century, ancient China was credited with four great inventions: gunpowder, paper making, compass, and moveable-type printing. Ancient China also grew in economic power, constituting 26% of the world GDP in 206 BC, 58% in the 7-9th century, and 60% of the global GDP in the 10-13th century. Like all ancient civilisations, ancient China declined in power and influence and was invaded by Western forces and Japan in the 18th century, which influenced the Chinese psyche for generations. This history of past economic development, though not a predictor of future economic status, mirrors hope, possibilities and what could be achieved with visionary leadership and excellent governance structures for China. Although almost on its knees by the middle of the 20th century, China came up with a way of working out of the dungeons of lack of productivity and economic quagmire.

    The founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, led by Mao Zedong, opened a new chapter in Chinese history. From the ashes of the Korean War, the PR of China effectively began economic reconstruction with the first five-year development plan as the foundation. Within 1953-1957, the visionary Chinese leaders established a solid foundation for its industrial renaissance. The scheme delivered over 10,000 large-scale industrial projects covering the construction of 250,000 km of railways, aviation, power generation, automobile production, precision equipment, steel pipes, and radio.

    1978 marked a turning point in the development of China. Deng Xiaoping opened China to the outside world, introduced foreign direct investment, and legalised private investment. The private sector-led economy led to the establishment of a socialist market economy system and the development of capital markets and stock exchanges. The government privatised almost all small and medium-sized state-owned enterprises and lifted price control over most products. But this pragmatic approach is only the beginning of a phenomenal development. This unprecedented and rapid economic development reflects the quality of Chinese practical and visionary leadership.

    The leaders of China centred the emancipation of China on economic growth. They pursued a vision of a new China using the instrumentality of economic growth as a strategy to power a great nation. A study of three of China’s most consequential leaders revealed a remarkable pattern contributing to their phenomenal prosperity. The three leaders are Mao Zedong, popularly called Chairman Mao, who is the architect of a unified China and the People’s Republic of China. The second is Deng Xiaoping, the champion of reform, which opened China to the world in 1978. Lastly, Xi Jinping is the father of modernisation and the current leader of China. He is leading the digital China: digital industrialisation, industrial digitisation, digital governance, and data ‘valurisation’. All three leaders share five common traits: their subscription to the power of ideas, strategic thinking, pragmatism, discipline, and resilience in sticking to a clear vision. Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward and Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms transformed China’s economy, and subsequent leaders have prioritised economic growth and development to maintain social stability. Xi Jinping also follows a similar path of economic prosperity as a pathway to social peace.

    China is unarguably the world’s manufacturing hub. It is a product of vision, strong leadership, discipline, meticulous planning, hard work, and resilience. Powered by visionary leadership, China is focused on modernisation and digital civilisation today. They achieved zero poverty society in 2021, number 2 in research and development globally in the past five years and above USD 3 trillion in reserves since 2011. The power of visionary leadership does not submit to excuses.

    In contrast, historically, Nigeria was a product of colonisation and cannot lay serious claim to historic economic progress of any significance in Africa. It is a fact that Nigeria suffered the double whammy of slavery and colonialism and was just a property for subjugation by Britain. Its fight in the pre-colonial period was a fight for survival and statehood. Having been conquered culturally, religiously, and economically, Nigeria was gasping for air to breathe when Britain gave independence. The independence, by all ramifications, was just a paper victory, and the fight for freedom and prosperity started in 1960 when our leaders were clamouring for the dignity of the black man.

    Post-1960s, much remained the same concerning leadership outcomes. Our leadership quality has even worsened and has since plummeted. Except for a handful, each subsequent leader plunges Nigeria more into the abyss. And Nigeria is in dire need of visionary leaders that will transform it like the Chinese leaders did to China. Who are our innovative and visionary leaders in the mould of Chairman Mao, Deng Xiaoping, and Xi Jinping? Who among our leaders has created a vision of economic growth based on productivity and put in place the structures and systems that will make it work? Unlike most Nigerian leaders, most Chinese leaders are long-term thinkers. Developing strategic thinking involves thinking about more significant macro issues, unlike the micro focus many tend to take in Nigeria. Strategic thinking means seeing how the world, the country and the broader economy will evolve and function. It also includes thinking long-term in contrast to near-term, our trademark in Nigeria.

    Notably, in 1978, when China laid the foundations of economic emancipation, Nigeria’s per capita income was better than the Chinese. China’s per capita income was around $155 to $175. Nigeria’s per capita income was around $350 to $400. Nigeria’s per capita income was double that of China. In 2022, China’s per capita was $12,814, while Nigeria’s was $2184. This is over 10,000 USD more than Nigeria’s. It beggars belief! Since 1978, China’s per capita has increased by over 50 times by 2022, whilst Nigeria’s has increased marginally by five times. We don’t need to look further to identify the cause of this. What is our shared or common vision? China, from 1978, focused on Better Life and Prosperity for all. Leaders and strategy have changed, but every leader has yet to abandon this vision. We had Development plans at various times: Operation Feed the Nation, Green Revolution, Vision 2010, Vision 2035, and Vision 2050. What happened to all our long- and medium-term plans? Why did they fail, and did the Chinese succeed?

    China’s economic growth is a multifaceted force reshaping the world order in complex ways. It challenges existing norms and global power structures, creates new opportunities in business, supply chain, technology and innovation. China’s growing influence has forced countries, especially in Africa, to navigate a changing geopolitical and resource control landscape. How these implications unfold will depend on the strategies and policies adopted by China and other countries in response to this evolving global dynamic. China’s hard and soft power is evident, and the world has taken notice. Besides, China is vying for global economic pre-eminence with the US but has no economic comparative advantage yet. However, the leadership factor puts it at a strategic advantage because of its unique one-party authoritarian model that aggressively pushes for growth and defies the hitherto philosophy that economic advancement is impossible outside the Western democratic and capitalist model.

    Nigeria needs more focused economic planning, a clear and achievable vision and goals, and a clear understanding of its position in the emerging New World Order. In this Order, capital and economic development is premium. The core lesson from the China experiment is that pragmatic and visionary leadership makes a tremendous difference in economic growth. Nigeria needs such now more than ever. Our new president has a date with history to map a course that makes him such a leader. History beckons.

  • Saving the Naira and ourselves – By Dakuku Peterside

    Saving the Naira and ourselves – By Dakuku Peterside

    Indeed Naira, the Nigerian legal tender, has no religion, tribe or tongue. It is common to all of us as Nigerians and foreign nationals whose businesses involve cash exchanges in the Nigerian currency. Anything that happens to the Naira affects everyone who transacts with it.

    As is the case with the currencies of other nations, the value of the Naira is not determined by some gods, prayers or incantations. Nor is it by a group of Nigerian eggheads sitting on a round table to apportion value to it. The Naira’s volatility, weakness, stability or strength is a function of the economic choices we make and the forces of demand and supply. Unfortunately, these two factors have combined and conspired against the Naira now more than in the past.

    The Naira has witnessed a steady decline since the Federal Government announced the floating of the Naira. It has lost more than 40% value against the US Dollar within two months of implementation of the policy. This is the most significant drop in its history. As expected, the Naira crisis has caused unprecedented economic uncertainty and hardship in the country. Prices of goods and services have gone off the roof. Fuel price has more than doubled and inflation rate is at an all-time high. Nigerians paying international school fees and medical bills abroad now know that the rich also cry. Everybody in Nigeria is feeling the pinch one way or another.

    But the fall of the Naira did not start now. Its tragic history dates to 1983 when it began the nosedive and has not ameliorated till date.

    From the 1960s to the 1980s, the Naira was relatively stable against the US Dollar. However, Nigeria faced economic challenges due to fluctuations in global oil prices and mismanagement of her oil resources. In 1983, 1 USD was exchanged for about 72 kobo. But by 1986 when Nigeria implemented a World Bank-induced currency devaluation due to falling oil prices and economic difficulties, the Naira fell to exchanging at about N9 to 1 USD by 1990. The Naira faced further significant devaluation as Nigeria dealt with economic and political instability in the 90s. In the year 2000, 1 USD was exchanged for about N85 at the official window. To stem the decline in its value, the Naira was pegged to the US Dollar for a period; even though removing this peg eventually led to further devaluation. In 2010, 1 USD was exchanged for about N150 officially but not at the notorious black market. In the 2010s, the Naira experienced several devaluations partly due to oil price volatility and economic challenges. By 2020, 1 USD exchanged for about N360 at the official window.

    In recent years, the Naira has continued to face challenges related to external factors. These include fluctuations in oil prices and the global economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. A few days ago, the Naira fell to an all-time low against the USD by exchanging between about N890-N930 to 1 USD.

    Although I am not an economist, I will  attempt a commonsensical interpretation and critical analysis of the continuous erosion of the Naira value and share some multidisciplinary perspective to the issue. First, let us examine the basics. The exchange rate is a function of factors. It is primarily the demand and supply of forex. The current crisis is principally one of supply. Our forex supply includes oil sale receipts, diaspora remittances and non-oil export proceeds. Oil receipts that depend on international prices have been hampered by factors like oil theft, invoicing and massive corruption in handling government revenue. We export little or no finished goods, given our low manufacturing base.

    Our second source of forex is Diaspora remittances. These have been consistent at about $25bn annually. Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) bring in forex, but these have fallen significantly in recent years. Foreign loans are another source of forex into Nigeria. However, with Nigeria borrowing a lot recently for various projects and stabilising the economy the appetite for foreign loans is low. These sources, put together, are not enough to meet our massive demand for forex.

    The demand side of this crisis is potent. Many factors fuel this considerable demand. The first is that successive poor management of our economy has eroded confidence in the local currency. Nigerians now price goods and services in USD and prefer to hold value in dollars. In addition, the US is the unscripted ‘official’ currency of Nigeria’s vast underground corruption economy. These illicit transactions are of such huge volume that they heavily pressure available dollar cash supplies. It is an open secret that some political payments made during the last election were made in USD, thus creating a scarcity of USD during the election season. Those who got these payments saved the excess in USD, thereby starving the market of Dollar cash.

    For a predominantly import-dependent economy, legitimate import transactions take the form of the import of raw materials, finished goods, invisible and other services. For a population of over 220 million people, legitimate forex transactions are enough to put massive pressure on our external reserves. Those reserves have incidentally been heavily depleted by the recklessness of the managers of the economy in

    our recent past who used part of our reserves to hedge against external loans. The alarming reality therefrom is this. Of an advertised foreign reserve of $38bn, only about $18 bn is unencumbered.

    Another point to consider in this demand problem is this. It is made worse by the activities of currency speculators taking advantage of the limited quantity of USD in the system to cause havoc to an already stretched and volatile forex regime. Little wonder the forex crisis was exacerbated with the recent addition of oil subsidy removal and Naira floating policies. Although these policies are good economic policies, their fallout has negatively impacted the forex situation. The merged exchange rate regime converges all forex demand around the parallel market rate and this has remained volatile ever since the policy was implemented. The official market has little or no Dollars to offer hence the recent recourse to an Afrexim bank facility of $3bn to shore up the declining Naira and throw a lifeline to the economy. Even with liquidity in the official market, dealing with forex transactions is still very slow. Banks take weeks or sometimes months before consummating a forex transaction for most Nigerians. Most instant forex demand is in cash at the parallel market rate. This has kept the black market as active as ever, although one aim of floating the Naira is to eliminate the menace of the black market in the forex ecosystem. These failures have kept away some foreign and local investors with forex and made others reluctant to invest. Besides, oil importers need forex at the current rate to sustain imports.

    Other psychosocial factors are enabling the Naira crisis and must be addressed. First, Nigerians have an excessive love for foreign goods and services. Related to it is the fact that we are not producing enough locally and our export is far lower than our import.

    Second, our dependence on crude oil for decades has been our bane. Thus, fluctuations in crude oil prices in the international market have continued to keep the Naira very unstable. In relation, there is a nexus between the instability of the Naira, the massive corruption among the elites and concomitant misplaced priorities of the governing class. The opportunity costs of stolen funds are the lost structures and systems of production that Nigeria badly needs now to be productive. We have lost decades that we would have built capacity, created the much-needed physical and knowledge infrastructure and laid the foundation for an industrialised society. We have focused on survival and curbing poverty instead of productivity, innovation and growth which will eliminate poverty. We have been driving looking through the rear view mirror instead of looking forward to creating an industrialised society.

    Third, the perception of our country at home and on the global scene is abysmal. Whilst most Nigerians in Diaspora are making great strides, news from Nigeria itself is depressing. We are battling with everything negative anyone can think of. Sadly, it seems we have accepted these things as the norm.

    The current forex crisis and fall in the exchange value of the Naira resulted from a combination of all these factors. The task before the government then is to isolate and deal with these factors as clear and present economic challenges, each requiring informed tackling.

    Addressing  financial challenges and preventing a collapse of the Naira is a complex process that involves multiple factors. The success of any panoply of measures to tackle the erosion of the value of the Naira also depends on a number of factors . Starting point , the  government should do some of the following: implement some Monetary Policy adjustments; Currency Stabilisation by intervening in the forex market; Fiscal Policy Reforms; Structural Reforms such as reducing corruption and promoting economic diversification; seek external assistance from international financial institutions; promoting export and reducing imports; enhancing Investor Confidence; providing transparent economic policies and strong governance, making stringent efforts to attract foreign investment; giving out clear communication about the steps being taken to address the situation; and tackle speculative activities in the forex market. The war to save the Naira from collapse is our collective responsibility. We must all come together to fight to save our Naira.

  • Hunger is real and present – By Dakuku Peterside

    Hunger is real and present – By Dakuku Peterside

    Hunger is widespread and chronic in Nigeria, and its prevalence is one phenomenon that statistics cannot fully capture; not even the global hunger index does justice to it. Statistics deals with numbers, but hunger deals with humans. Relying on quantitative data alone to assess the state of hunger in Nigeria is the worst mistake anybody could make. Quantitative data and analysis only show patterns and spread of hunger without delving into the individual lived experiences of those affected and its influences on their existence in all ramifications. Therefore, as bad as the statistics are, they are still child’s play compared to the rich information from qualitative data chronicling the dehumanising lived experience of many poor and hungry Nigerians around us. Combining quantitative and qualitative data paints a horrifying picture of Nigeria’s food crisis and hunger.

    According to UNICEF, about 25 million Nigerians are at risk of facing hunger between June and August 2023. Given the current food inflation sweeping the country, we fear even more people may join the ranks. Many families today cannot afford essential food items, even among the  middle class. Careful observation during events and functions will reveal how “Item 7 “has gained new prominence among participants. People scramble for food; some even take food home for their families. Before now, low-income families manage to eat twice daily, but now that is a luxury they cannot afford. Family heads and breadwinners are bitterly complaining that their ‘take home’ barely gets home much more to cover the cost of food and other necessities of life. Hunger has a new face, and you can see it in the faces of vulnerable adults and children who look malnourished or are on the brink of starvation. Children are the most vulnerable to food insecurity. Approximately six million food-insecure Nigerians today are children “under 5” living in Borno, Adamawa, Yobe, Sokoto, Katsina and Zamfara states, and there is a severe risk of mortality among children attributed to acute malnutrition, posits UNICEF.

    There is no gainsaying the devastating effect of hunger in Nigeria. Some parts of the country are affected the most, primarily due to conflicts, insecurity and climate change that have either stopped agricultural activities or have led to massive movement of people from farming and grazing  zones to IDP centres dotted across the country. Other parts of the country not affected by this are feeling the pinch of hunger due to the recent high cost of energy and its impact on transportation that led to an astronomical rise in the price of food items, and effectively and gradually putting food (not even quality, nutritious food) out of the reach of many Nigerians.

    A few structural issues exacerbating hunger in Nigeria include poverty – a significant portion of the Nigerian population lives below the poverty line, which limits their access to necessities, including food; lack of economic opportunities for many people – lack of job opportunities or the availability of low-paying jobs can result in inadequate income to afford enough food; inefficient agricultural practices; agricultural challenges that impact food production and its value chain; harsh environmental conditions including irregular rainfall patterns, droughts, and flooding; rapid population growth; limited access to education; poor infrastructure including roads (accessible rural roads to transport food easily), storage facilities, and electricity; lack of investment in agriculture; inefficient governance; weak policy implementation; and inadequate coordination among government agencies. No doubt, food security and fighting hunger had not been our priority, and the problem is now staring us in the face.

    Today,  the incidence of hunger has increased and expanded .  Hunger amongst the populace is a clear and present danger which, if not addressed and effectively managed, could lead to the breakdown of law and order. A hungry man is an angry man. This angst gradually flows into the street and may have severe consequences if not checkmated. This partially explains why the average Nigerian is angry and aggressive on the street. There is a vast population of Nigerians that hunger can wipe out if nothing serious is done in the short term. Hunger dehumanises people and pushes them into a life of crime, superstition, and penury.

    The devastating effect of hunger in Nigeria includes malnutrition with its concomitant health problems such as child cognitive developmental delays, stunted growth, weakened immune systems, and increased susceptibility to diseases. Maternal and child mortality rates are also higher in areas with high hunger levels. Second, hunger can hinder children’s access to education. Malnourished children often have reduced energy and focus, making it difficult to engage in learning activities effectively. Third, it can lead to reduced productivity and economic potential. Malnourished individuals are less likely to be able to work and contribute fully to their communities and the economy. Fourth, hunger and poverty are interconnected. They can limit people’s ability to work and earn a living, perpetuating the cycle of poverty for generations. Fifth, persistent hunger can hinder the development of a skilled and productive workforce, which is essential for the long-term growth and stability of the country.

    Besides, we must learn lessons from other countries that have faced similar difficulties and got out of it. I propose we study the situation in INDIA in the 1950s and 1960s when it was the hunger epicentre of the world. India was referred to as the “begging bowl nation” because of the devastating impact of hunger on the nation. They have reduced the case of hunger and lifted themselves out of the world’s dungeons of poverty and hunger epicentre. Nigeria is ingloriously moving towards holding this nefarious record. Also, in 2015, India put together a National Food Security Act, which helped 800 million people access publicly financed or subsidised food as an interim measure to fight hunger.

    It is essential to acknowledge that hunger is a complex issue with deep-rooted causes, and sustainable solutions require collaboration, resources, and long-term commitment from various stakeholders. Addressing hunger in Nigeria needs a multifaceted and comprehensive approach that involves efforts from the government, non-governmental organisations, international agencies, and the private sector. The pertinent question begging for an answer is: how do we solve the hunger problem that is increasing at an alarming rate in Nigeria today?

    Fortunately, this administration professes to take the war to hunger. Acknowledged governments don’t feed people but can create food security through economic policy . The president recently declared a state of emergency on food insecurity and marshalled  out programmes and activities his administration will undertake in the short term to tackle the menace of hunger in Nigeria. His administration has mobilised over half a billion dollars for innovative and sustainable food systems transformation initiatives. The government has developed its Value Chain Development Programme (VCDP) as a unique example of a successful partnership between producers, the public sector, and private operators. The VCDP aims to empower vulnerable farmers and youth to engage in commercial partnerships with some of the world’s most extensive food processing and marketing firms and capacitate Nigeria’s rural smallholders and operators, youth and women living below the poverty line to take advantage of the new Special Processing Zones.

    The president, in his recent speech to the nation, promised to ensure prices of food items remain available and affordable, and he ordered the release of 200,000 metric tonnes of grain from strategic reserves to households across the country and 225,000 metric tonnes of fertiliser, seedlings, and other farm inputs to farmers. His administration will support the cultivation of 500,000 hectares of farmland with crops such as rice, maise, wheat, and cassava. I pray that the impact of these measures will be significant and will be the foundation to build on in the coming years in this fight against hunger.

    These efforts are noteworthy in the interim and will help alleviate the pangs of hunger in the land in the immediate future. I will further advocate for a more aggressive push to stem the tide of hunger. We do not have time to wait for short, medium, or even long-term measures. We need to activate emergency measures that will have an immediate impact now. Farming and food production takes a session (sometimes up to one year from planting to harvesting and food on a plate). We do not have the luxury of time to intervene in this hunger menace. I applaud the government’s decision to release grains from the strategic reserve depots, but it must ensure these grains get to hungry Nigerians at affordable prices.

    There must be a deliberate engagement of public, private and third sectors to efficiently leverage resources, expertise, and network to implement these emergency hunger alleviation measures. There may be a need for providing emergency food assistance to people significantly affected, providing food price monitoring and control (commodity market boards), strategic food reserves and distributions, providing widespread nutrition programmes, subsidising agricultural inputs, and in extraordinary circumstances, direct cash transfers to low-income families that are in dire need.

    It is significant to note that this is a learning curve for Nigeria. Conquering hunger or food poverty will be one of the greatest benefits of democracy in our clime . In summary, the way out of this hunger problem is through sound economic policies that make agriculture attractive (particularly to the youth), as well as institutional reforms that protect land tenure, raise farmers’ productivity, boost supply, and lower prices to consumers, while also ensuring good returns for agricultural investment.

  • Niger: Trouble in the Neighbourhood – By Dakuku Peterside

    Niger: Trouble in the Neighbourhood – By Dakuku Peterside

    Niger Republic is Nigeria’s next-door neighbour. She is not the best neighbour Nigeria would desire but, as a sovereign nation, we have no control over her. Her economic statistics, population demographics, poverty and security threats – terrorism, insurgency, and inter-communal conflicts – are too much baggage for a neighbour any nation will want to have. However, like all responsible neighbours, a threat to a neighbour is a threat on you. A fire outbreak in your neighbour’s house is a valid threat to your own safety and it is in your enlightened self-interest to ensure peace in the neighbourhood. Only then can you have a measure of peace. Relating this to countries sharing borders, Nigeria needs peace at this crucial time to address her socio-economic and security challenges.

    Of recent, the peace of Niger Republic has been threatened and breached. Last week, members of the elite Presidential Guard successfully overthrew the elected government of President Mohammed Bazoum and named General Abdourahomene Tchiani as President of the National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland. This development has effectively created instability in that country and the West African sub-region. The Nigerien experience makes it the fifth  military coup in the sub-region since 2020 following earlier coup d’etat in Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea,  and Mali. As expected, the UN, USA, EU , UK, ECOWAS, Nigeria, and other world leaders have condemned these constitutional breaches. However, the world is looking to Nigeria to lead the sub-region in fighting against the contagion of coups that are destroying the democratic foundations of the past decades and turning the region into the coups epicentre of the world. The expectation is not misplaced. As the dominant regional power, Nigeria has a moral and diplomatic responsibility for ensuring stability in the neighbourhood.

    There is no denying that this coup has destabilized Niger. Or that the aftermath of this destabilisation will have grave consequences on the region and Nigeria in particular. The system has notable chaos and a complete sense of unease in a country already battling with extremism and terrorism attacks from Boko Haram and Islamic State West African Province fighters in addition to exponential economic hardship. The ousted President is known for his unrelenting fight against terrorist groups within his country and the sub-region. His overthrow and the resultant instability may leave room for terrorist groups in Niger to strategize,  and reinforce their actions against States within the sub-region.

    Terrorism thrives in failed States with little or no legitimate government. It creates leeway for non-state actors to have a field day and act with impunity. This recent development in Niger will certainly create an additional burden for Nigeria. To be more exact, instability in Niger Republic will affect Nigeria in four significant ways. First, any security vacuum created by this instability will be used by extremist groups, criminal networks and other destabilising elements to upturn all the gains Niger and other Sahel  countries in the sub-region have made over a decade in containing these groups. When these groups thrive in Niger, they attack neighbouring countries with common boundaries with Niger. Nigeria will be the main target, mainly because she shares borders with Niger across Bornu, Yobe, Jigawa, Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto and Kebbi States. That is the longest border Nigeria shares with any country. This poses a significant risk to Nigeria’s fragile internal security. A destabilised Niger Republic will be a free breeding ground for terrorists and provide unrestricted passage to Nigeria for Boko Haram and other terrorist groups through the Diffa region.

    Second, Nigeria will most likely bear the brunt of Niger’s refugee crisis. Niger Republic, which already serves as a transit point for migrants and refugees, has a high youth population and the world’s highest birth rate. Any destabilisation of Niger Republic will lead to a massive refugee movement into Nigeria through our seemingly porous borders. Most Nigeriens can trek into Nigeria. Besides, Niger is an agrarian economy. With climate change and conflict, it is only natural for their farmers and herders to migrate to Nigeria. This will compound and exacerbate our now very challenging farmer-pastoral clashes.

    Third, the crisis in Niger will provide a valid threat to the growth and deepening of democracy in the West African sub-region. The ousted President’s election was the first democratic transition of power in a State that has witnessed four military coups since independence from France in 1960. This would be a reversal of all gains made therefore. Already, three countries in the West African sub-region are under military rule. Two others: The Gambia and Guinea Bissau’s democracy are being sustained by Nigeria. A fragile Niger signals susceptibility to unconstitutional rule in other West African (WA) democracies. Militarism and juntas leading many States in the West African sub-region do not inspire confidence and may be seen as retrogressive by other stakeholders. Each successful coup provides some cues or encouragement for subsequent ones. Like insurgencies, coups are rooted in governance failings, population conflicts and the nature of civilian and military relations within the state. The Nigerian State must ensure that such fertile grounds for coups are not in place in countries in the sub-region. Nigeria is working hard for more regional economic and political integration through the instrumentality of the ECOWAS and must work to forestall unsavoury political developments such as we have in Niger since crisis in any member-State sabotages the effort Nigeria is leading and jeopardises regional integration.

    Fourth, the coup in Niger Republic is an affront to Nigeria’s leadership in West Africa. Aside from affecting us directly as a country, it will affect our standing as regional and continental leaders. How Nigeria, as a regional power, engages and interacts with its neighbour determines how we keep our status as a continental power. Our reputation is at stake. The world is watching how Nigeria will successfully deal with this crisis in Niger. Therefore, the world expects the Nigerian State to work unilaterally or within regional and continental institutions such as ECOWAS and AU to solve this crisis. On our part, Africa remains the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy. Our nation constitutes the conscience of the world. All these attributes entrusts Nigeria with the responsibility of championing democratic tenets in and for the continent. Failure to accomplish this sacred duty would negatively impact the global perception of Nigeria as a net contributor to global power dynamics. In the execution of her sacred role, Nigeria must send a clear message that not again on her watch will a State on the continent – particularly on the West Coast – fall to the cold hands of military juntas. The world must never perceive Nigeria as a fallen power or a toothless bulldog that barks but cannot bite.

    This crisis is a significant challenge for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Nigeria who doubles as the leader of ECOWAS. Both roles put him at the fore of dealing with this crisis. Thankfully, he has vowed to show no tolerance for coups in the region. By that proclamation alone, he has started the hard work to re-establish Nigeria’s regional leadership and end the crisis in Niger. He started well by following a clear strategy for dealing with the situation by first condemning the coup in toto and commencing diplomatic engagements to stem the tide.

    President Bola Tinubu sent a planeload of his senior officers to press the Niger military to abort the takeover. Although the mission may be unsuccessful at the moment, this kind of leadership from within the region is commendable. The new Nigerian and ECOWAS leader has continued to engage with world leaders such as the US Vice President, the Secretary-General of the UN, Heads of State of countries within the sub-region and other vital stakeholders to fashion out the best multilateral approach of a lasting solution to the problem. He is galvanising the ECOWAS and AU for a collaborative institutional approach. Yesterday 30th July  in Abuja , ECOWAS leaders made a cocktail of significant decisions aimed at dislodging the junta  . It includes imposition of no flight zone , air and land boarder closure , financial sanctions, without ruling out the use of force . The international community will be watching out how far ECOWAS can go in its resolve to restore constitutional order .

    In searching for the results to this political crisis, we must come to terms with its anatomy by conducting a near infallible diagnosis of the symptoms it presents. There is a nexus of local, regional and global factors at play in this crisis. We must highlight this connection, especially while articulating a comprehensive solution to this crisis and laying the foundation to prevent coup d’etat from being staged in any other country in the sub-region going forward. This is especially important given the role France, as former colonial masters with more cultural, political, economic and military ties, plays in the emerging milieu. The ousted President has a robust link with France and that window can come in handy. However,  recent global events have seen the possible push by the Russian/Chinese hegemonies to take control of some African countries and push out the US and her Western allies. Some African militaries are counting on this emerging global divide and are taking their chances knowing there are opportunities of having the backing of either of the powers after a coup.

    Every international or multilateral intervention must dispassionately examine the root cause(s) of the leadership crisis and the unmet needs or unresolved conflicts that are driving coups. There is the need and no effort should be spared to strengthen Niger’s institutions and broader civil society, provide more economic investments and support intense diplomacy. The latter may include use of military force to produce regime change. The enduring solution to the Nigerien debacle is this. Nigeria, other principal voices in the subregion and global actors must work in collaboration to pull Niger back from this or any future military dictatorship.

  • Dakuku Peterside to speak at Int’l Bunker Conference in Ghana

    Dakuku Peterside to speak at Int’l Bunker Conference in Ghana

    One of the leading voices in the African maritime sector, Dr. Dakuku Peterside, is to speak at the forthcoming International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA) Africa conference in Accra, Ghana from September 5-7, 2023

    The International Bunker Conference (IBC) has become a world-renowned forum for the international bunker industry. About 500 industry experts and industry stakeholders from around the globe are expected to attend this year’s conference. The organizers, The International Bunker Industry Association (IBIA) is the voice of the global bunker industry and represents all stakeholders across the industry value chain.

    Peterside, who is the immediate past director general of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), will be sharing thoughts and ideas with industry experts, regulators, investors, operators, and policymakers.

    A Public Sector Turnaround expert, he will be speaking from a well-informed background, having also been the Chairman of the Association of Africa Maritime Administrations (AAMA), whilst holding the helm of affairs at NIMASA.

    During his term, Peterside rejuvenated the maritime regulatory agency and made it one of the most admired among Ministries, Departments, and Agencies( MDA) in Nigeria.

    A co-founder of Growth and Transformation Professionals (GTpro), Africa’s foremost government relations and policy strategy consultancy firm, he brings a wealth of experience and expertise to the conference that promises to look to at the dynamics in the African maritime sector.

    Since leaving NIMASA, Dakuku Peterside has had several speaking engagements in several countries, within and outside Africa, where he continued to share his thoughts and processes with government officials, maritime operators, regulators, and investors. This year alone, he has been lead speaker in maritime conferences in Kenya, Egypt, Singapore, and South Africa.

  • Something fishy in our waters – By Dakuku Peterside

    Something fishy in our waters – By Dakuku Peterside

    It is a scientific fact that water and oil do not mix, but in the complex and complicated world of criminal enterprise, this natural law does not apply. It is becoming evident that in Nigeria’s crude oil theft industry, there is an inexplicable convergence of interest against the interest of the country. This has gone on for too long , hurting our economic calculations as a country.

    A massive vessel, “MT Tura 11”, laden with 800 metric tonnes (erroneously stated as 800,000 litres) of stolen crude oil, was intercepted on Escravos Sea in Delta State by operatives of Tantita Security Services Limited. They handed over the vessel to the military Joint Task Force (JTF) Operation Delta Safe troops.

    The JTF personnel allegedly set the bunkering vessel ablaze on Warri River after the ship’s captain confessed that the ship was laden with crude oil. Could the recent arrest and subsequent setting ablaze of a vessel used for oil theft be a case of a complex web of organised economic crime or failure of law enforcement? The facts of this case are as intriguing as the entire landscape of oil theft, maritime crime, and environmental degradation in the Niger Delta. This operation has caused considerable unease among stakeholders in the oil and gas industry, maritime space, law enforcement and ecological conservation activists. It raises a lot of fundamental questions with no answers in sight.

    First, is the burning or destruction of vessels transporting stolen crude oil the best approach to fighting the crime? This entails destroying evidence that would aid investigation and prosecution. The hasty destruction of the oil theft vessel raises questions about due process in the fight against what may be considered a complex economic crime against the state. In every crime investigation system and process, the instant destruction of evidence leaves a trail of further suspicion.

    There are elements of concealment of a wider crime that a more thorough and discreet investigation will reveal. This vessel had been arrested severally in connection with crude oil theft and released. We are unaware of any arrest and prosecution connected with these previous incidents. The JTF had, in October 2022, destroyed a vessel, MT Deima, allegedly carrying stolen crude. Burning vessels used for crude oil theft is now a common practice and a pattern of a deterrent.

    The Defence Headquarters’ defence to this noxious practice is a certain executive order given by former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2003. However, in 2019, facilitated by Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Nigeria’s National Assembly passed the Suppression of Piracy and Other Maritime Offences Act (SPOMO Act), which provided the legal framework to deal with this kind of issue, including provisions for asset forfeiture and disposal of proceeds.

    Second, will burning crude oil at sea not exacerbate the already severe environmental degradation in the Niger Delta? Elementary science has taught us that it will lead to air and marine pollution, degraded mangroves, and oceans, and destroyed biodiversity and vegetation.

    In this instance, the burning of 800 MT of crude, if it took place, will have far-reaching and long-lasting effects on the environment and the communities dependent on it. The cleaning up of the environment could take several weeks. While addressing the issue of stolen crude should remain crucial, environmental protection must remain a priority.

    Third, on the issue of law enforcement, with multiple maritime intelligence gathering technology available in the country, such as Nigerian Navy’s “Falcon Eye”, NIMASA’s “C4i and NPA’s “C3i”, how come none was able to detect a tanker vessel as big as MT Tura 11 or MT Deima? Does it not raise curiosity that it took a security contractor rather than the Navy or other security agencies to intercept and arrest the rogue vessel?   Is this a case of conspiracy, complicity or just abdication or dereliction of duty? When juxtaposed with the allegation of Mujahid Asari Dokubo of a compromised military, it calls for deep investigation, interrogation, and introspection.

    There are obvious vested interests, and things are unravelling. And one wonders whether this operation has anything to do with the N48 billion per annum pipeline surveillance and security contract. Is there a “Wangerisation agenda” in the crude oil pipeline contract?

    This incident provides an opportunity for a holistic review of our approach to fighting oil theft in the country. The criminal violation in oil theft has been a concern for years. This is despite the existence and presence of the Navy in the suspected theatres. Getting to the bottom of this criminal enterprise requires more than the arrest of one errant vessel. It requires a thorough investigation to establish the missing links between the arrested vessel and other activities in the past. As we already know, oil theft is a major national economic crisis that requires a deeper understanding and collaborative action as a national priority.

    A few issues are for consideration. Should we not consider asset forfeiture and disposal instead of burning, which is barbaric, crude, unhealthy and toxic? Have we considered recovery and repurposing the stolen crude for legitimate use? What level of interagency collaboration do we have in the fight against crude oil thieves? From the overall layout of the narrative, it is obvious something is fishy.

    Crude oil theft is a significant challenge in Nigeria, and tackling it requires a systematic and bespoke approach involving various stakeholders. We need to articulate some strategies to address this economic malady. Recognising that addressing crude oil theft requires a multi-faceted and sustained effort involving government agencies, law enforcement, communities, and international partners is crucial. Combining these strategies with continuous monitoring, evaluation, and adaptation of approaches can significantly reduce crude oil theft in Nigeria. Some of these strategies are in place now, but their functionality could be better since they have not eradicated the scourge of oil theft in Nigeria. Efficient and effective implementation is a crucial success factor.

    Activities such as enhancing security measures in oil-producing regions are crucial. This includes increasing patrols, establishing dedicated security forces, and deploying technology such as surveillance systems and drones to monitor pipelines and oil infrastructure. Cooperation between the Nigerian Navy, NIMASA, the Nigerian Police, and other security agencies is essential to combat oil theft effectively. Besides, engaging with local communities in oil-producing regions is vital for addressing the root causes of crude oil theft. It is essential to create awareness about the negative impacts of oil theft on the environment, economy, and local livelihoods. Encouraging community members to report suspicious activities and offering alternative sources of income can help reduce the incentive for involvement in oil theft.

    Also, protecting pipelines from tampering and illegal tapping is crucial. Implementing technologies like pipeline monitoring systems, pressure sensors, and leak detection systems can help promptly identify and respond to unauthorised activities. Regular inspections and maintenance of pipelines are necessary to ensure their integrity and reduce vulnerabilities.

    Furthermore, strengthening legal frameworks and imposing stricter penalties for oil theft can act as a deterrent. Enforcing existing laws and regulations effectively, prosecuting perpetrators, and confiscating assets obtained through illegal activities can help combat oil theft. Also, enhancing governance and promoting transparency in the oil sector is essential to tackle oil theft. Implementing measures to curb corruption, improve revenue management, and ensure accountability in the oil industry can help reduce opportunities for theft and illegal activities.

    Collaboration is key to effectively addressing crude oil theft in Nigeria. Collaborating with international partners to address the transnational nature of oil theft is crucial. Sharing intelligence, best practices, and technical expertise can help Nigeria in its efforts to combat oil theft. Cooperation with neighbouring countries to prevent smuggling and illegally exporting stolen oil is also important. Collaboration between oil companies operating in Nigeria and relevant industry associations is essential. These entities can share information and collaborate on security measures, technology implementation, and best practices to protect oil infrastructure. Cooperation can include exchanging information on suspicious activities and joint initiatives to address oil theft.

    Besides, collaboration with technology providers specialising in pipeline security, surveillance systems, and monitoring technologies can significantly enhance efforts to tackle crude oil theft.

    Finally, collaborating with financial institutions can help track and disrupt the financial networks associated with crude oil theft. Sharing information on suspicious transactions, implementing stricter financial controls, and working together to freeze and seize assets obtained through illegal activities can undermine the profitability of oil theft operations.

    Establishing platforms for regular communication, coordination, and information sharing among these collaborating entities is important.

    It is important to reiterate that strategies and actions of the past have not worked, and this new administration must desist from following them. Now is the time for a new bold approach to tackling the menace of crude theft. The systems that allow such impunity are entrenched and will be difficult to uproot. This calls for a deliberate intervention from Nigeria’s highest point of leadership. The President must send a clear message that he will not accept the stealing of even a drop of our crude oil, and those behind such atrocity must stop or face the wrath of the law no matter how highly placed they are. It is a national embarrassment for news of crude oil theft to pervade the local and international space. Nigeria must protect its resources at all costs.