Nigerian economy and the Washington package

 

Now that Nigeria has finally embarked on the total implementation of the Washington Consensus package of neoliberal economic policies, what becomes of the country’s economy, in the long run, remains to be seen. 

As a product of consensus among the Washington-based World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the United States Department of the Treasury, the package was purportedly designed to guide developing countries bedevilled by protracted economic crises to recovery and achieve sustainable economic development. 

Also, as a capitalist template with inherent and unmistakable lopsidedness in favour of the rich and those with access to public resources, the package encourages governments to literally but gradually wash their hands of the critical economic sectors in favour of profit-oriented local and foreign investors.

Under pressure from neoliberal international financial institutions, successive Nigerian governments have gone to various extents in selective and partial implementation of the package, triggering rounds of controversy. 

However, now with the country going fully and irreversibly capitalist, there is no more time to waste in criticising capitalism and romanticising some obsolete socialist and populist ideas that are no longer realistic. After all, the reform policies can still work out if the federal government pursues requisite measures, which include, among other things, total transparency in governance, governance cost-cutting and prioritisation of the strategic sectors of the economy that have a direct bearing on people’s lives. 

In other words, for the reform to be effective, governance at all levels must be too transparent to accommodate any act of corruption; and anti-corruption measures, including appropriate punishments, must be in force and deterrent enough to deter any would-be perpetrator. 

Likewise, appropriate governance cost-cutting measures must be implemented judiciously to save resources without prejudice to productivity and efficacy.   

Equally, public spending must strictly follow the public’s priorities that entail appropriate investments in strategic sectors with clear short, medium and long-term goals measured not by mere figures but by their real effect on people’s living conditions. 

With these and other requisite measures in place, the investment atmosphere in the country will be transparent and competitive enough to attract local and foreign investors with appropriate job-creating investments that would facilitate real and sustainable economic development. 

That way, and with time, the local and foreign rent-seeking opportunists and profiteers, who have dominated the business sphere in the country, making hugely disproportionate returns compared to their real investments, will have to follow suit to remain relevant or simply lose out. 

Unless the Tinubu administration pursues these measures with appropriate commitment, the reform will end up counterproductive, thus making life even more unbearable to most Nigerians. At the same time, a tiny politico-business clique continue to wallow in abundance.

Interestingly, there has been conspicuous silence on the part of our local West-admiring Washington Consensus apologists, who have advocated total capitalist reform as the only panacea to the country’s persistent underdevelopment. Ordinarily, having passionately advocated it, they should now feel morally obliged to show some understanding, or at least fake it, over the ensuing escalating hardship in the country. 

Besides, though supposedly experts in economics and other related fields, none have developed a viable alternative economic recovery package or even introduced viable inputs to the Washington Consensus package to make it relevant to our peculiar circumstances and other underlying challenges.

Daddy

Counting the cost of Kano demolitions

 

Notwithstanding the appropriateness or otherwise of the recent and unprecedented wave of demolitions in Kano by the newly inaugurated governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf, it may have triggered a vicious circle of the incumbent governors and their predecessors taking turns revoking, converting and reallocating public land and facilities in the state. 

Though purportedly guided by relevant legislation and overriding public interest, successive Kano state governors have been involved, to various extents, in controversial public land and facility-related scandals. However, the immediate past governor, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, having literally overdone it, has been particularly notorious in this regard. 

Now with the recent demolitions, Governor Abba has proven that it’s indeed his turn. The way they were conducted, which made the operation look more like mob action, has been effectively set as a precedent for future similar operations in the state. 

So, unless this looming vicious circle is averted, Kano may, after every four or eight-year tenure, witness similar operations with persistently worsening intensity and impacts.   

Having monitored the situation from afar, thanks to the viral video clips on social media, I felt not only sad but extremely embarrassed watching helplessly how my city, a supposedly aspiring mega city, was being systematically bastardized.

I watched in shocked dismay how the lives of innocent traders, who simply happened to be tenets in the targeted buildings, were being turned to, perhaps, perpetual misery overnight by crowds of sadist creatures feigning being human looting their (traders) merchandise. Some buildings had already been looted even before the demolition team got there. There are verified heartbreaking stories about the plights of many victims. In a particular instance, one was reliably reported to have gone mad out of frustration. 

The sheer ferocity with which the mob plundered traders’ goods suggests deep-seated populist sadism and sheer envy in a society where tacit gloating over the misfortune of any real or perceived wealthy person has become normal. I have also observed tacit attempts on social media by many otherwise reasonable people to underestimate the plights of the victims and even put the blame on them for their ‘failure’ to evacuate their goods in time. 

Meanwhile, the cumulative impacts of this vicious circle on the state’s economy and other strategic interests cannot be overestimated. It’s already seriously affecting local investor confidence, for no one will consider the viability of any significant investment, especially in, say, real estate development and other related sectors, knowing that the land allocation is prone to arbitrary revocation and the structures are subject to impulsive demolition at any time. 

Equally, banks and other financial institutions will have to discontinue recognizing Kano government-issued certificates of property ownership as collateral, knowing that they may at any time be rendered as worthless as takardar tsire. 

Likewise, the state’s attractiveness to direct foreign investment (if there is currently any) will be hit even harder, for no prospective foreign investor, being typically particularly sensitive to any red flag suggesting policy inconsistency, will consider investing in Kano knowing that whatever policy or incentive attracted him can be impulsively terminated at any time. 

Now, obviously, Governor Abba is aware deep down that that wasn’t how he was supposed to handle the situation in the first place. His approach is enough to vindicate those who insist that he is simply on a vengeance mission with a premeditated resolve to settle scores with political opponents and their associates on behalf of his political godfather, Rabi’u Kwankwaso. 

He can address whatever land use abuses his predecessor committed, which are so many, by the way, but he should do it in a civilized way through due process leading to the demolishing of what indeed deserves to be demolished and sparing what deserves to be spared for the purpose of reclaiming and converting it into a public facility. 

At the mercy of delegates: The imperative of breaking free

Regardless of the expectation and anticipation with which the new administration in Nigeria is being greeted, there is no better time than now to embark on efforts to address the underlying challenges that have always undermined the credibility of primaries, hopefully by the 2027 election season, relevant legislation and methods will have been duly reformed.

Towards every election season, people lament the scarcity of suitable candidates for elective positions, which they also rightly attribute to the systematic manipulation of the party nomination process by powerful vested interests within the parties, who impose candidates on the electorate via charades in the name of party consensus or primaries by some hand-picked party delegates.

Public officeholders and other party elites use the instruments of power and public resources at their disposal to ensure the emergence of their political associates, in addition to themselves, of course, as party delegates with a mandate to elect party candidates, on occasion typically characterised by systematic vote buying deals between delegates offering their consciences (if any) for sale. Deep-pocketed politicians jostle to outbid one another.

That has discouraged many conscientious individuals with the potential to turn things around in their respective jurisdictions given the mandate from getting into politics, for they rightly wouldn’t bootlick any so-called political godfather or bribe any greed-motivated delegate. After all, many like-minded individuals have ventured into politics but ended up frustrated at the hands of party manipulators. In contrast, many others of similar calibre have compromised their moral principles to join the corrupt elite they have previously often castigated.

Consequently, the electorate is left with the dilemma of choosing amongst candidates with notorious pasts for gross incompetence, massive corruption cases, and even court convictions against many of them. The average voter, therefore, betrays his underlying frustration by voting for the highest bidder amongst the candidates or voting for whoever his immediate political master endorses, with some hope that the candidate will win. His master will be rewarded with some political appointment or other privileges, for him (voter) to be occasionally rewarded with peanuts by the master throughout his stay in office or continuation of his privileges.

Only a few votes with a conviction may still not be in order anyway, for it might be influenced by one manipulative tactic or another.

Ironically also, there is general indifference in all segments of society. Even democratic activists and advocates for good governance, who are supposed to be particularly committed to demanding, among other things, the reform of the party nomination process, have been largely and inexcusably indifferent. They only rant in futility when it’s too late, i.e. when birds of a feather flock together have emerged as their respective parties’ candidates. Many have become mere attention-seeking opportunists hiding behind activism to extort political appointments and other privileges from the politicians they have criticised in return for their loyalty.

Even the few voices of reason in society only urge the electorate to vote for the so-called best of a bad bunch among the candidates, if any.

Now, until relevant legislation governing the party nomination process and the methods of conducting it are reformed in such a way that it guarantees maximum transparency in the process, the kind of change Nigerians wish for under democracy will never be achieved.

Instead of chasing shadows, therefore, it’s high time that genuine advocates for good governance and other concerned groups and associations embarked on a concerted campaign to demand the reform of relevant legislation to abolish the current corruption-laden delegate primaries and consensus and adopt a direct and transparent primary where all party members are eligible to vote, as the only legal method of nominating party candidates at all levels.

The imperative of demanding such reform represents a challenge that puts Nigerians’ yearning for good governance to the test. If the next general election doesn’t achieve the reform, then the yearning is simply not genuine enough. 

However, even when realised, it’s naive to assume it’s unmanipulable. Vested interests within parties will keep trying to manipulate it. Yet, when sustained, it will undoubtedly make the quest for good governance more achievable, enabling people at various levels to push for and secure the emergence of the best amongst them as parties’ candidates for various elective offices.

That way, Nigerians will be able to break free from the grip of party delegates to freely elect the calibre of people with the capacity, credibility, inventiveness, and passion necessary to turn things around in the country.

Though the beneficiaries of the status quo will vehemently resist and undermine any attempt to reform it, they will eventually succumb to the collective willpower of the people, provided they remain passionate, resilient, and determined enough.

 

Erdogan-Muslim Brotherhood alliance: Between patronage and betrayal

(Link on Daily Trust) 

 

When, a decade ago, the Muslim Brotherhood politicians were riding the waves of the “Arab Spring” across the Middle East and North Africa to rise to power, a tacit political alliance somehow developed between them and the then Turkish Prime Minister Erdoğan, who later transformed into executive president in 2014. 

 

Having dominated Turkish politics since his coming into power in 2003, Erdoğan has pursued geopolitical dominance in the region. His ability to ride the waves of Muslim emotions with publicity stunts during and in the aftermath of every major incident of persecution against vulnerable Muslim communities and his characteristic Islamo-populist rhetoric earned him immense popularity among unsuspecting Muslims and even many otherwise discerning pundits for that matter. 

 

Also, his character-switching skills, which enable him to effortlessly transform from a typical secular politician he is into an Islamist he claims to be, and vice versa, depending on the circumstances, enables him to balance up his purported Islamist orientation in the eyes of his admirers and his secular disposition among his fellow politicians in regional and global politics. 

 

Anyway, though the Muslim Brotherhood organization wasn’t the initiator of the “Arab Spring”, its politicians were the biggest beneficiaries, having risen to power by leveraging their longstanding popularity among the unsuspecting general public who fell for their purported Islamist agenda.

 

President Erdoğan had seen in them potential governments in their respective countries, which he could manipulate in pursuit of his geopolitical ambitions. While, on their part, they saw in him a reliable patron who could be instrumental in their struggle against the deep state in their respective countries and facilitate their integration into mainstream politics on the global stage. 

 

Soon, influential media organizations linked to the Muslim brotherhood, especially the Aljazeera network, embarked on the systematic idolization of Erdoğan in a well-crafted narrative. 

 

All along, President Erdoğan has been particularly interested in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, being the umbrella organization that all its offshoots and other like-minded groups in the region and beyond look up to. 

 

The first post-“Arab Spring” election in 2012 that brought the Muslim Brotherhood to the presidency in Egypt under former President Mohammad Mursi was a dream come true for the organization. Besides, considering the geopolitical significance of Egypt as the most populous Arab country and indeed one of the most influential in the region, the Muslim Brotherhood was well-positioned to engineer similar political momentum in other countries for their offshoots there to equally get power. 

 

Though over the past decade, all the Muslim Brotherhood parties in power have lost out through either political process or military takeover, their loss of Egypt following the 2013 military takeover was particularly frustrating to Erdoğan. Since then, he literally went berserk sparing no effort to vilify and instigate the international community against the Egyptian authorities. He also opened up Turkey for the Muslim Brotherhood members from Egypt and elsewhere who soon adopted the country as their exile headquarters. He also enabled them to set up satellite television channels and other media outlets that unleashed a systematic and concerted campaign of disparagement and incitement against the Egyptian authorities and other Arab governments especially the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). 

 

President Erdoğan, also, rode the waves of the backslash against the Kingdom over the murder of the Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, in 2018, inside its Consulate in Istanbul, to embark on the vilification of the Kingdom. 

 

Of course, Turkish relationships with Egypt and Saudi Araba consequently deteriorated very badly, affecting trade and economic ties, especially with Saudi Arabia whose businesses suspended importation from Turkey while Saudis’ investments there took a nosedive, worsening the country’s already struggling economy. The situation is further compounded by Erdoğan’s equally deteriorating relationships with other countries including some major European economies e.g., Germany and France.  

 

Meanwhile, the general public in Turkey has been increasingly frustrated amid worsening economic conditions, which President Erdoğan has repeatedly vowed to arrest but failed. 

 

The 2019 local election in Turkey proved the extent of that frustration when, despite his alliance with other parties and a controversial change in the electoral law that allegedly favoured his party, President Erdoğan’s party suffered a huge setback, losing important cities to the opposition including Istanbul and Ankara, Turkish largest city and capital respectively. 

 

President Erdoğan realised the potential implications of the situation on his re-election bid in the 2023 general election, especially considering the results of the 2019 local election. 

 

Since last year, therefore, he embarked on mending fences with Saudi Arabia to thereafter normalize trade and economic ties with it and hopefully secure some bailout to ease the persistent financial crunch in his country. By the way, Saudi Arabia does some friendly countries in need such a favour. Anyway, he equally reached out to Egypt to normalize diplomatic relations with it. 

 

Meanwhile, he had already begun gradual abandonment of the Muslim Brotherhood by imposing restrictions on their operations in Turkey that leave them with no option but to leave the country. For instance, he ordered their television channels to stop their campaign of vilification against Egypt and shut down some of them altogether. 

 

Erdoğan also abandoned the Khashoggi murder case, handed it over to Saudi Arabia, and turned from an aggressive critic of the Kingdom into Saudi-friendly. He even visited the Kingdom on an official visit and received its Crown Prince, Ibn Salam, on a similar visit to Turkey. 

 

Meanwhile, many Muslim Brotherhood elements have already left Turkey as others explore their options and next destinations. 

Geopolitics of Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline

(Link on Daily Trust)

During the Moroccan King Mohammed VI's first-ever visit to Nigeria in 2016, since his ascension to the throne 18 years earlier, the ambitious Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project was unveiled to transport Nigerian gas to Morocco and potentially Europe via 13 other existing and potential West African gas importing countries from Nigeria. 

The $25bn 7,000km project would be an extension of the existing offshore pipeline currently running from Lagos to Cotonou, Lomé, Tema and Takoradi; and is designed to extend further, covering Abidjan, Monrovia, Freetown, Conakry, Banjul, Dakar, Nouakchott, Tangiers in Morocco, and Cádiz in Spain. When completed in 25 years, it would be the world's longest offshore pipeline. 

 

Though Nigeria and Morocco have maintained a diplomatic relationship over the decades, the former's support for the sovereignty of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), which the latter has vehemently resisted, claiming that it's part of its territories, has kept the relationship quite cold, to say the least. 

 

Besides, Morocco had, in 1984, withdrawn from the then Organisation for African Unity (OAU), in protest against the organisation's decision to recognise the SADR as a member-state. It remained the only African country that wasn't a member of the continental body for thirty-three years until 2017 when its request for readmission to the body, which had changed its name to African Union (AU), was granted. 

 

However, even before its readmission, Morocco has been trying to improve its relationship with Nigeria in its increasingly desperate pursuit of alternative sources of gas supply away from Algeria, one of its important sources of gas yet its geopolitical rival and indeed next-door archenemy.  

 

Morocco has relied on Algerian gas for a tenth of its electricity production under the Maghreb-Europe gas pipeline arrangement that transports Algerian gas to Spain through Moroccan territories.

 

Though Algeria and Morocco share largely the same historical, ethnocultural, and religious backgrounds, their relationship has been characterised by tensions over border disputes, leading to armed skirmishes on many occasions and even a full-scale war in 1963. 

 

Also, Algeria's support for the Sahrawi people's struggle for independence has fueled the persistent tensions and fierce geopolitical power struggle between the two neighbours whose shared land borders have remained closed since 1994.  

 

Last year, Algeria cut off its already tension-ridden relationship with Morocco; and barely a month later, it followed it through with a decision to not renew the gas supply contract via the pipeline that goes through Morocco, thereby effectively ending its gas supply to Morocco, reassuring Spain, however, that it wouldn't be affected as it (Algeria) would instead use its direct offshore pipeline and shipping to maintain the supply to it. Since then, renewed tensions between Algeria and Morocco heightened, warning of an imminent war at some point. 

 

Obviously, Morocco had anticipated Algeria's decision to cut off the gas supply to it, which explains its determined pursuit of an alternative source from Nigeria. After all, the fact that it (Morocco) realises that the Nigeria-Morocco pipeline would only reach its territories at its final stage i.e., after 25 years, yet it remains determined to proceed anyway, suggests its loss of hope in the possibility of an improved relationship with Algeria that would guarantee her reliable and sustainable gas supply free of the nightmare of political blackmail. 

 

Interestingly, long before this project was proposed, Algeria had apparently anticipated it and hence wanted to undermine its feasibility and frustrate it all along by proposing the Trans-Saharan gas pipeline to transport Nigerian gas to Europe via the Republic of Niger and Algerian territories. It has since pushed for it that an agreement to that effect between it and Nigeria was, in fact, signed in 2002. It has equally tried to dissuade Nigeria from going ahead with the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project. 

 

Yet, a similar geopolitical power struggle between Russia and the US-led NATO member-countries over Ukraine appears to equally cast a dark shadow over the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project. 

 

Russia is the largest gas supplier to Europe; and since the beginning of its invasion of Ukraine, it has manipulated the supply to blackmail the NATO, which has responded to the invasion with, among other things, growing economic and political sanctions against Russia.

 

Since then, the NATO-member countries have been increasingly desperate, exploring alternative sources of gas supply to wean themselves off Russian gas and free themselves from its blackmail. 

 

Russia, on its part, realises that the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline has the potential to eventually transport Nigerian gas across Europe from Spain once the pipeline infrastructure is further extended, which would render Russian gas dispensable in the continent. 

 

To prevent that prospect, therefore, Russia has now offered to invest in the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project as a tactical move to end up in a position to influence its operations when completed.  

 

While it remains to be seen how things would unfold, the Nigerian authorities seem hardly aware of the underlying geopolitics of the project, much less interested in identifying appropriate interests to pursue in the process.