Why Okonjo-Iweala Was Right

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s statement that President Tinubu deserves credit for stabilising the economy is not just diplomatic—it’s analytically sound. Stability is the prerequisite for any meaningful reform. Without it, growth is impossible.

But unfortunately, many Nigerians appear to have misread Mrs. Okonjo-Iweala, leading to misguided backlash. Let us break down the reality using the analogy of doctors in an emergency unit of a hospital:

Economic triage analogy: Nigeria was haemorrhaging from reckless monetary expansion, subsidy fraud, and forex arbitrage. Tinubu’s early actions—removing fuel subsidy, halting money printing, and unifying forex markets—were akin to emergency surgery to stabilise patient Nigeria.

Inflation containment: Inflation, while still high, has stopped its dangerous upward spiral. July 2025 figures show a cooling to 21.88%. This is stability.

Forex rationalisation: The naira now trades within a stable band (N1,500–N1,600), eliminating arbitrage opportunities that previously drained public funds.

This is stability.

But Stabilisation Is Not a Cure

Stability is the floor, not the ceiling. Without growth and social cushioning, patient Nigeria risks slipping into economic coma. Let us put two of the flagship policies of Tinubunomics under the X-ray

Fuel subsidy removal: While it stopped treasury looting, it hasn’t yet catalysed domestic refining.

NNPCL refineries remain idle, and Dangote’s monopoly lacks pricing pressure.

Forex unification: It ended arbitrage but made imports prohibitively expensive.

No clear import substitution strategy has followed.

Growth Requires Sectoral Activation

Mrs. Iweala’s call for growth and safety nets is a roadmap. Here’s what’s needed

Sector Reform Needed

Agriculture – Security for farmers, mechanisation, irrigation

Industry – Power supply, tax reform, infrastructure

Energy & Power – Attract private sector operatorship of TCN for grid upgrades and modernisation, unbundle the DISCOs and re-award licences to more competent operators. Boost crude oil production: The US has 50 billion bbls in reserves and producing 13 million bbls per day. Nigeria has 38 billion bbls in reserves but producing less than 2 million bbls.

Infrastructure – Roads, rail, broadband. 35 states are still not connected to the federal capital by rail.

Digital Economy – Rural connectivity, start-up support

Health & Education – Primary care, public health, hospital infrastructure, healthcare workers’ welfare, school infrastructure, teachers’ welfare.

Fiscal Capacity and Private Sector Involvement

Given a federal budget of approximately $35 billion, Nigeria’s fiscal space is severely constrained. This allocation must cover a wide array of obligations—from debt servicing and recurrent expenditure to essential public services—leaving limited room for strategic investment in growth-driving sectors such as infrastructure, manufacturing, and innovation.To bridge this gap, the active participation of the private sector is not optional—it is imperative. Unlocking private capital, fostering public-private partnerships, and creating a predictable investment climate are critical to achieving sustainable development and inclusive economic expansion. The government must focus on enabling policies, while the private sector drives execution and scale.

Conclusion: Stabilisation Is Not Success.

Tinubu’s reforms have stopped the bleeding. But healing requires sustained treatment—growth, jobs, and protection for the vulnerable – which must come with speed! Okonjo-Iweala’s assessment is not just correct; it’s a call to action.

Nick Agule is a Nigerian citizen and public affairs analyst passionate about the development of Nigeria.

Email: nick.agule@yahoo.co.uk

X: Nick Agule, FCA

Facebook: Nick Agule, FCA

By Wilfred Uji

I once wrote an article based on a thorough research that all the states of North Central of Nigeria, Kwara, Niger, Kogi, Benue, Plateau and Nasarawa States, share a great deal of historical relations, resources, ethnicity and intergroup relations. These states have a common shared boarders with common security challenges that can only be effectively managed and resolved from a regional perspective and framework.

The exercise at the creation of states have overtime drawn arbitrary boundaries which in contemporary times are critical security and developmental issues that affects the sub region.

Firstly is the knowledge and teaching of history that can help grow and promote a regional unity and intergroup relations.

As far back as the pre-colonial era, the North Central of Nigeria had a plethora of multi ethnic groups which co-existed within the framework of mutual dependence exploiting indigenous peace initiatives. The diverse ethnic groups comprising of Nupe, Gwari, Gbagi, Eggon, Igala, Idoma, Jukun, Alago, Tiv, Gwanadara, Birom, Tarok, Angas, etc were independent state sovereignties before the advent of British colonial rule by the first quarter of the twentieth century.

Secoundly that British colonialism for economic and political exigencies almagamated all these ethnic groups under the Northern Region with headquarters first at Lokoja and later moved to Kaduna.

The indirect rule policy placed all the traditional political chiefdoms of the sub region under the political supervision, for the convience of taxation and draft labor, under the Sokoto Caliphate.

The indirect rule political structure was not intended to be a game changer that would enforce the dominance and hegemony of the Sokoto Caliphate over the people, land and resources of the sub region.

Thirdly, in the realization of the above, the British colonial state first created the Munchi Province and later the Benue Province as a political and state framework that could accommodate all the ethnic diversity of some of the North Central people.

State creation which ought to allow room for minority representation and expression, over time, has been turned upside down, by some ethnic groups as a vehicle of the exclusion of some minority groups.

For instance, the creation of Benue State in 1976 and Nasarawa State in 1996, does not signify and imply the exclusion of the Tiv and Idoma from Nasarawa State as well as the exclusion of the Alago and Jukun from Benue State.

These ethnic groups, long before state creation, had indigenous roots in all the states of the North Central of Nigeria. Historically, it is misleading and erroneous for these ethnic nationalities to be regarded as tenant settlers in the states where they are located.

The term tenant settlers have been used by the ruling political class of some states of the North Central of Nigeria as a staging point for land grabbing, genocide, land claims and struggles that has created a night mare for the security landscape of the region. In contemporary times, there is no denying the fact that there is an ethnic question in the North Central of Nigeria where there has been a revival of ethnic nationalism by some irredentist groups reinforced by revisionist historians. The ethnic nationalism which on one hand is a cultural revival but on the other promotes a hate agenda, is dangerous and antithetical to the inter group relations and unity of the North Central of Nigeria.

Ethnic hate, the idea that some ethnic nationalities do not belong or have indigenous roots in a state, has been responsible for some of the modern genocide and massacre in the history of modern Nigeria.

For political and security reasons, there is scanty research in this regard, the study of modern genocide backed by state action. Or where such research exist, it is often play down and watered as inter group conflicts and violent hostilities that should be treated with kids gloves and palliatives. This liberal and pessimistic approach to conflict management has been a responsible factor in the decimal reoccurrence of violent ethnic conflicts of the North Central States. The Liberal approach to conflict management, looks at the symptoms instead of the treatment of the disease.

Ethnocentrism is both an African and Nigerian reality that over time and space has been fueled and exploited by the ruling political class and elites. It is one of critical challenge of nation building in Africa that appears to be a curse of a continent and people.

All nations of the world have their share of the nightmare of ethnic and racial bigotry at one point or the other in their national history and transformation.

In the United States of America, it was dubbed the race question in the post emancipation era, the politics of the color line as William Dubios described the racial tension and phenomenon of his prevailing age and society. The race question sparked many reactions including the establishment of societies and organizations for the protection of the African American as well as the defence of the fundamental civil rights of the “American Negro”.

One of such initiative adopted by the State in America which was aimed at the improvement of the welfare and wellbeing of the African American as as his integration into main stream society was the establishment of the Bureau For Freed Men on race relations. The Bureau as a Federal institution was designed for the reconciliation of the inequality and segregation of the African American inorder for him to access equitable development and national resources, but, more importantly, political representation at both state and national level.

Subsequently, the Bureau came up with a number of proactive programmes and policies including the Affirmative Action as well as Federal Character Quota Systems that ensured the equitable and just integration of African Americans in main stream society and politics.

In recent years, Nigeria has established some regional frameworks that can translate into the creation of a Bureau for Ethnic Relations. One of such regional framework is the establishment of the North Central Development Commission by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The Development Commission if strategically placed and positioned, can create a Bureau For Ethnic Relations that will help promote and reconcile inter-ethnic relations and development within the North Central of Nigeria.

I am limited as to the mandate of the commission interms development and the transformation of the North Central of Nigeria.

If the commission suffers from a deficit to manage ethnic relations along the lines of affirmative action and federal character principle, then, the federal government should as a matter of social priority establish an Bureau For Ethnic Relations of the six geopolitical units of Nigeria.

Let me end this write up by using the words of William Dubios that the challenge of Nigeria in the twenty first century is that of ethnic relations, it is that of the ethnic content, that of fairer skin races to that of the dark skin races.

Prof. Uji Wilfred is from the Department of History and International Studies, Federal University of Lafia

By David Torough, Abuja

A university scholar, Prof. Uji Wilfred of the Department of History and International Studies, Federal University of Lafia, has called on the Federal Government to establish a National Bureau for Ethnic Relations to strengthen inter-group unity and address the deep-seated ethnic tensions in Nigeria, particularly in the North Central region.

Prof.

Wilfred, in a paper drawing from years of research, argued that the six states of the North Central—Kwara, Niger, Kogi, Benue, Plateau, and Nasarawa share long-standing historical, cultural, and economic ties that have been eroded by arbitrary state boundaries and ethnic politics.

According to him, pre-colonial North Central Nigeria was home to a rich mix of ethnic groups—including Nupe, Gwari, Gbagi, Eggon, Igala, Idoma, Jukun, Alago, Tiv, Birom, Tarok, Angas, among others, who coexisted through indigenous peace mechanisms.

These communities, he noted, were amalgamated by British colonial authorities under the Northern Region, first headquartered in Lokoja before being moved to Kaduna.

He stressed that state creation, which was intended to promote minority inclusion, has in some cases fueled exclusionary politics and ethnic tensions. “It is historically misleading,” Wilfred stated, “to regard certain ethnic nationalities as mere tenant settlers in states where they have deep indigenous roots.”

The don warned that such narratives have been exploited by political elites for land grabbing, ethnic cleansing, and violent conflicts, undermining security in the sub-region.

He likened Nigeria’s ethnic question to America’s historic “race question” and urged the adoption of structures similar to the Freedmen’s Bureau, which addressed racial inequality in post-emancipation America through affirmative action and equitable representation.

Wilfred acknowledged the recent creation of the North Central Development Commission by President Bola Tinubu as a step in the right direction, but said its mandate may not be sufficient to address ethnic relations.

He urged the federal government to either expand the commission’s role or create a dedicated Bureau for Ethnic Relations in all six geo-political zones to foster reconciliation, equality, and sustainable development.

Quoting African-American scholar W.E.B. Du Bois, Prof. Wilfred concluded that the challenge of Nigeria in the 21st century is fundamentally one of ethnic relations, which must be addressed with deliberate policies for unity and integration.