Wanted: A Multi-dimensional Insecurity Offensive, By SOS/Sonala Olumhense

By SOS/Sonala Olumhense

As you may already have heard, the World Bank this week in Washington DC warned that poverty in Nigeria will increase by a whopping 3.6 percentage points through 2027.

That time span covers President Bola Tinubu’s first term and the beginning of his “Grab it, snatch it, run with it” second term.

The bank makes the disclosure in its Africa’s Pulse report (PDF) released at the ongoing Spring Meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. It said that non-resource-rich countries are expected to continue reducing poverty faster than resource-rich countries such as Nigeria.

The Bank reflects on the current predicament of African governments, as they must contend with rising social unrest, and calls for better security, basic services, and access to economic opportunities.

“Breaking the cycle of mistrust between people and their government requires changing the way governments provide for their citizens, building public confidence through providing efficient services and fair regulations,” it says.

The Bank describes 2024 as a year of youth protests in Africa, asserting that taking their demands seriously is key in the context of the demographic transition and youth migration. In July of that year, the Council on Foreign Relations characterized this as “A Sense of Foreboding” in Nigeria.

The report observes that the link between economic grievance and political stability runs both ways: pooreconomic opportunity exacerbates political discontent, while the risk of conflict and violence can severely undermine economic activity and investment.

“Escaping the cycle of poor growth outcomes and political grievances will require that governments prioritize the delivery of practical solutions for their citizens,” it says. “This implies focusing on areas where governments directly affect people’s lives—providing quality public services and fairly regulated market competition.”

The report notes that delivering such results will require a shift in the way many governments work: “away from rent-seeking and narrow power bases and toward more inclusive, transparent, and accountable service delivery and market oversight.”

But such a shift in governance is fundamental to building citizens’ trust, strengthening the social contract, and creating incentives for positive engagement between citizens and their governments, the report further states, affirming that governments must prioritize the delivery of practical solutions.

“Transparency can shape governments’ incentives to respond to citizens and curb opportunities for cronyism and clientelism. It is an important channel through which inclusive politics can redress government failures to deliver equitable services and opportunities.”

Among others, the report cites calls for better security, basic services, and access to economic opportunities as being at the heart of citizen discontent and lack of trust in government, stressing that existing growth and job opportunities are insufficient to meet the rapid expansion of the population.

While the report is about Africa, it obviously best describes Nigeria, already the poverty capital of the world, and the country that is the most insensitive to the notion of transparency and responsibility in government.

Consider, for instance, that in the same week, Mr. Tinubu finally returned from a gratuitous personal holiday abroad, one he took allegedly as a “working visit” while hunger and poverty mounted alongside egregious acts of insecurity.

What did he do about the insecurity as soon as he returned? You got it right: he gathered “security chiefs” in Abuja.

What did the meeting achieve? According to the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, it was merely an opportunity to “brief” the president.

“We provided him with an update on what has been happening, including developments during his time away…Even while he was out of the country, he remained in constant touch. He gave directives and followed developments closely. Today, we who are in charge of security had the opportunity to brief him thoroughly—for hours. It was a very detailed and exhaustive session. We covered everything from A to Z.”

It was a public relations effort and a waste of time. To begin with, if the president had been in constant touchand was providing directives during his absence, what was the point of a “very detailed and exhaustive session”?

We have seen this for 10 straight years under the APC system: meetings of the powerful and secure in Aso Rock, Nigeria’s most secure real estate, while the country burns. If the president were serious, he mighthave taken his seriousness to one of the most affected states, thus demonstrating to the people that he means business. On his way back, he would have left behind some of the security chiefs with detailed instructions for them to report on progress being made every week.

The truth is that under Tinubu, as it was with Muhammadu Buhari, there is no clear definition of what constitutes insecurity, and if you cannot define a problem, you cannot define a strategy and or a solution. Remember that just last month, one of the top officials at this week’s meeting of “security chiefs” was solving the insecurity by saying that Nigerians should defend themselves. You cannot expect to win if you are responding in the same way or with the same machinery to terrorism, militancy, armed robbery, kidnapping, banditry, and debilitating farmers-herdersclashes.

Nigerian leaders are failing to resolve the insecurity for this reason, responding by repeatedly gathering the presidential Security Summit to eat boneless fried chicken and drink tea. We are combating a complicated problem by the same blandness and insensitivity as sending Senate President Godswill Akpabio to lead a delegation of Catholic Bishops to the funeral of Pope Francis! [And no, I do not know why the Bishops agreed to that insult.]

What this means is simply that the poverty about which the World Bank eloquently warns will mutate and multiply rapidly because unless the government can reverse the insecurity firmly and quickly, Nigeria as a country is in grave danger.

Nigeria is not simply facing insecurity: she is facing insecurities, including from certain interests within the government, as well as large-scale incompetence and compromise. If we are to make any progress, we must first be clear what the fault lines are and then outline the best responses.

To repeat: it is inconceivable that for the better part of two decades, criminal gangs and militia have continuedto enjoy uninterrupted inflows of weapons and ammunition despite our plethora of intelligence agencies. It makes no sense that with the arsenals of technology and weaponry available to Nigeria’s security forces, these criminals have grown stronger. If that was partly attributable to the singular weakness and incompetence of Buhari, what excuse does Tinubu have, given that he can treat Nigeria’s ailments from France?

It is now one month before the Nigerian leader’s second anniversary, which will serve as the informal commencement of his campaign for a second term. Everybody knows that Tinubu did not win the 2023 election. And he has made the country significantly worse in his first two years, compromising basic values, and supplanting Buhari as Nigeria’s worsthypocrite and nepotist since independence.

Like the Bank, the world continues to warn Nigeria, as have many others, such as the London Financial Times,the World Street Journal The Economist, and the New York Times.

Enough of the empty air-conditioned security briefings! Execute a comprehensive, professional,multi-dimensional field offensive!!

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook