The best way to view the Nigerian nation is that it stands at a critical juncture. The central question is how to transform it from its current state into the country it ought to be: one of the world’s top 12 economies, with a low poverty rate and a growing, sustainable middle class.
In this context, the actions and decisions of the current government are particularly significant. The present government has made a very good start. While this is a contentious statement, it is the stark and honest reality. Without a painful fiscal rebalancing of the economy, Nigeria would have been a basket case by today, seeking a bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Therefore, the Bola Tinubu-led government deserves credit for averting what could have been a humiliating disaster and betrayal of the high hopes of independence.
In the span of just a few days, two events have occurred that helped to illuminate Nigeria’s current dilemma. The president’s state visit to Brazil, for instance, is significant not because it was unusual, but because the destination itself holds a deeper meaning.
Beyond the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding, Brazil’s experience should serve as a roadmap for the present government. During his first term in office, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva presided over a period where, according to figures from international organizations like the World Bank, approximately 40 million Brazilians were lifted out of poverty. This is an amazing feat for any democracy!
During his eight-year tenure, Lula da Silva never controlled the National Assembly and was consistently forced to negotiate legislation clause by clause. In spite of this, he pulled millions out of poverty, expanded the middle class, and unleashed Brazil’s hidden potential. This is a feat the Nigerian government should examine closely.
There is a lot to learn from Brazil. For example, the country used its homegrown school feeding programme not only to benefit schoolchildren but also to transform itself into a major agricultural powerhouse that exports semi- and fully-processed goods. This success was so significant that one of the articles of impeachment against Dilma Rousseff, Lula da Silva’s successor, was that Brazil had failed to meet its soybean export target to China.
In revamping its homegrown school feeding programme, Nigeria should have paid special attention to the similar programme engineered by Lula da Silva. The laudable recapitalization of the Bank of Agriculture (BOA) should provide a launching pad for revitalizing this programme and modernizing Nigeria’s entire agricultural value chain. This would lay the necessary foundation for the agro-allied sector to contribute at least 60% of Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings by 2032.
Another key lesson from Brazil is the success of its respected development bank, Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES). As The Economist once highlighted, it’s the world’s largest development bank, providing loans for major infrastructure projects with terms of up to 34 years. To learn from its success, a team from BOA should have been part of the delegation to build long-term relationships and hold detailed discussions with BNDES management.
Brazil and Nigeria, both developing nations, show divergent paths. Brazil’s diversified economy and stronger social systems have resulted in a GDP five times Nigeria’s and a much higher life expectancy. Nigeria’s economy, however, is crippled by its heavy dependence on oil, creating a “rentier state” where political elites control wealth instead of fostering a productive, broad-based economy. This has led to a profound disconnect between the nation’s immense resources and its citizens welfare.
The story of Nigeria and Brazil is an age-old joke that often makes its rounds. As the tale goes, Nigeria and Brazil arrived at the gates of heaven at the same time. Brazil’s representative began to complain to Saint Peter: “Why did you bless Nigeria with such an abundance of mineral resources, a fertile land, and beautiful landscapes, yet we were given so little?” Saint Peter smiled and simply asked Brazil to look at the kind of leaders Nigeria had.
This joke speaks to a powerful truth: a nation may be blessed with all the good things in life, but without capable and visionary leadership to show the way, all those blessings can amount to nothing. When you look at Nigeria’s case, had it been led by true statesmen like Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello and Michael Okpara, our story might have been entirely different.
Nigeria’s primary challenge is economic. Until the root causes of poverty are addressed, the myriad of political and security issues cannot be vanquished. This is the critical task facing the Tinubu administration. It must demonstrate the leadership and skills required to propel the nation forward, while citizens must cultivate the civic virtue to demand no less. Drawing from Brazil’s experience offers valuable lessons, and it is hoped these were thoroughly absorbed.
A second issue is the powerful speech given by Julius Sello Malema of the South Africa’s Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) showed great foresight and guts by inviting the firebrand to speak.
Malema was absolutely correct: the future of sub-Saharan Africa should be built upon a working partnership between post-apartheid South Africa and a resurgent Nigeria. This offers a clear, visible way out of the African dilemma, with the two forces working in tandem to realize the laudable objectives of the African Continental Free Trade Area.
South Africa and Nigeria have a historical duty to spearhead an African renaissance. However, Nigeria must first step up by emulating the independence and resilience of South Africa’s fine and effective institutions. To achieve substantial development, Nigeria must undergo an “institutional revolution.” Without strong institutions, no country can achieve sustainable progress. Even authoritarian regimes rely on professionalized and effective state institutions as the primary drivers of success.
The Nigerian dilemma can be solved by emulating the interwoven linkage between professionalized state institutions and their performance, a model clearly demonstrated by Singapore since 1965. This means all state institutions – including Customs, Immigration, and the internal security network – must be professionalized and made truly independent.
For instance, there is a marked difference in professionalism, independence and effectiveness between Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and its British equivalent, the Serious Fraud Office, as well as with their counterparts in Brazil and Malaysia. Without a paradigm shift, our foundations will remain weak and we’ll continue to struggle.
The bitter truth is that Brazil and South Africa are not just outperforming Nigeria, they are not in the same league. While the two are in the Premier League, Nigeria is in the 10th Division. Tragically, the country has been led by a “seventh eleven”, a team of uninspiring leaders.
Who would have wanted to travel to Singapore in 1965? Didn’t Lee Kuan Yew beat Nigeria at its own game in 1965? Now, the standard of living in Singapore is higher than in most states in the US, and two of its universities are among the world’s top 100. Meanwhile, where is the University of Ibadan, Nigeria’s premier university?
While Brazil (218 million) and South Africa (63 million) are full members of BRICS – and Brazil even holds a seat at the influential G20 table – Nigeria, with its whopping 230 million people, is still waiting for its invitation to the big leagues. Evidently, a massive population is just a fun fact, not a prerequisite for geopolitical power.
Who knew a country actually had to get its act together to join the grown-ups’ table? It seems the bar is set absurdly high: functional governance, economic stability, and maybe even a hint of political maturity.
May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
*KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419 – SMS only)
