Feature/OPED
Sustainable Development is a Necessity for Every Society in the World
By Professor Maurice Okoli
For the majority of African leaders and delegates, it was a momentous achievement, to participate and contribute speeches with diverse themes at the podium during the 78th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York. The UNGA traditionally meets in September, the highest global gathering to make several significant decisions on what the organization, consisting of 193 UN members, is generally expected to do. It has wrapped up its 78th annual session with another huge pack of commitments to engage in reshaping a better life for the entire population and Development paradigms in the world.
In the context of Africa’s Development, the extraordinary sessions combined with several top-level bilateral and multilateral meetings on the sidelines critically highlighted the existing multiple Development obstacles, the potential to reshape the continent’s priorities and bring to life the vision of African desires and the strategic pathways forward in the emerging future.
From the various perspectives and interpretations, African leaders have restated their longstanding fears of global South political dominance and hegemony, the shortfalls of a unipolar system, expressed support for some structural reforms within international organizations, and finally emphasized, as always, comprehensive and long-term Development plans for Africa that is already incorporated into the African Union’s Agenda 2063.
The idea of the UN’s sustainable development goals is nearing its extinction. In the experts’ views, especially among African politicians, intellectuals and development leaders during this period of pursuing the SDGs, to a large extent, the progress has been influenced by geopolitical enmity. And noticeably fierce confrontation between key global powers and multinational development banks have also slackened the expected financial pledges and commitments.
What Leaders Say at the General Assembly
United Nations chief António Guterres has stressed this point concerning the SDGs in different forms at several summits and conferences. At the opening of the meeting, he afresh called for a world that should be “more representative and responsive to the needs of developing economies” and added that the least developing world is persistently “trapped in a tangle of global crises.”
Without mincing words, Guterres has repeatedly called for sustainable and predictable financing for peacebuilding efforts. He also expressed concern about unconstitutional changes of government in parts of Africa and stressed the need for collaboration with the African Union to support peace efforts across the continent.
Now is the time to lift the declaration’s words off the page and invest in Development at scale like never before. The political statement includes a commitment to financing for developing countries and clear support for an annual SDG Stimulus of at least $500 billion.
A newly established ‘Leaders Group’ will develop clear steps to get funds flowing before 2024. The Leaders Group (LG) must turn commitments made at the Summit into concrete policies, budgets, investment portfolios and actions. In addition, LG should strengthen support for action across six key SDG areas: food, energy, digitalization, education, social protection and jobs, and biodiversity.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank are tasked to recapitalize and coordinate an urgent additional re-channeling of $100 billion in unused Special Drawing Rights. The Special Drawing Rights is an international reserve asset developed by the IMF to supplement the official foreign exchange reserves of its member countries and help provide them with liquidity. The largest-ever allocation, worth $650 billion, was carried out in August 2021 in response to the economic crisis generated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Nearly all African leaders have development-oriented complaints. Current Head of ECOWAS and Nigerian President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, in a few words on behalf of Nigeria, on behalf of Africa, indicated that failures in good governance have hindered sustainable development in Africa. “But broken promises, unfair treatment and outright exploitation from abroad have also exacted a heavy toll on our ability to progress,” he said, and despite the underlying conditions and causes of the economic challenges, promised to make relentless efforts to re-establish democratic governance in West Africa, including the French-speaking states now under interim military administrations. The wave crossing parts of Africa does not demonstrate favour towards coups. It is a demand for solutions to perennial problems. The negative impact and related problems also knock on Nigeria’s door.
Bola Ahmed Tinubu, among other issues, said African nations would fight climate change but must do so on its terms. Continental efforts regarding climate change would register important victories if established economies were more forthcoming with public and private sector investment for Africa’s preferred initiatives. As for Africa, given its abundant land resources, the creative and dynamic people desire prosperity. Africa is not a problem to be avoided, nor is it to be pitied. Africa is nothing less than the key to the world’s future.
William Ruto, President of Kenya, in a flowering speech also indicated that the time is up to pursue global peace and sustain positive changes for impoverished billion people in the world. “The tragic spectacle of young people from Africa boarding rickety contraptions to gamble their lives away on dangerous voyages in pursuit of opportunities abroad, as conflict, climate and economic refugees, is a testament of the failures of the global economic system,” he asserted at the gathering.
From diverse standpoints, there is no need to be trapped in a false choice: sustainable development is robust climate action and climate action is development. It is quite explicit that Africa’s potential is defined by abundant and diverse resources, ranging from a youthful, highly skilled and motivated population, immense renewable energy potential and mineral resources, including critical minerals, and extensive natural capital endowment, including 60% of the world’s unutilised arable land.
Capital and technology can find no better returns anywhere, than the tremendous investment opportunity in Africa’s potential. Such investment would drive green growth creating jobs and wealth while decarbonising global production and consumption. Therefore, to unlock financing at scale and create incentives for investments at scale in green opportunities, the Nairobi Declaration makes the reform of the international financial system a priority.
Moments like now place the nature and purpose of multilateralism under sharp scrutiny for history’s honest examination and judgement. If any confirmation was ever needed that the United Nations Security Council is dysfunctional, undemocratic, non-inclusive, un-representative and therefore incapable of delivering meaningful progress in the world.
Multilateralism has failed due to the abuse of trust, negligence and impunity. It is time for multilateralism to reflect the voice of the farmers, represent the hopes of villagers, champion the aspirations of pastoralists, defend the rights of fisherfolk, express the dreams of traders, respect the wishes of workers and, indeed, protect the welfare of all peoples of the world.
According to Ruto, the UN Secretary-General provided a graphic snapshot of the condition of the world and humanity, a situation that calls into question the state of multilateralism in terms of its founding aspirations, as well as its present agenda. The poverty, fear, suffering and humanitarian distress haunting the victims of conflict, drought, famine, flooding, wildfires, cyclones, deadly disease outbreaks and other disasters, are the outcomes of sustained violation of the most essential principles, and the systematic neglect of humanity’s dearest values, which lie at the very foundation of the UN charter since 1945.
President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa, addressed the UN General. Assembly on September 19, while pointing to the fact that every human effort should be directed towards realizing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development said, “Our energies have once again been diverted by the scourge of war.” While touching on several points including the need for inclusive, democratic, and representative international institutions, he also emphasized that “over millennia, the human race has demonstrated an enormous capacity for resilience, adaptation, innovation, compassion and solidarity … these qualities must be evident in how we work together as a global community and as nations of the world to end war and conflict.”
Referring assertively to the meeting held in early September by his country alongside Russia, India and China, and the BRICS summit in Johannesburg, in late August, President Ramaphosa urged all nations to demonstrate and resolve to secure a peaceful, prosperous, and sustainable future for the world and, more importantly, for the generations that will follow. “Leaving no one behind – that is the duty that we all have,” he said, recalling the guiding promise made by the international community with the adoption in 2015 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Scanning further through reports, UN refugee chief Filippo Grandi insisted that the world had “the means and the money” to prevent every one of those deaths. He called for an end to the fighting and more financial support for the emergency response in the country. The UN agency pointed to a context of “increased epidemic risk” and challenges for epidemic control across Africa. UNHCR’s Chief of Public Health, Dr Allen Maina drew attention to acutely malnourished and millions of people requiring care for chronic diseases in war-torn and conflicting African regions.
Speakers have equally highlighted the importance of engaging the youth in the development strategy and the decision-making processes. Often said, the youth are vibrant and could play supporting roles, therefore, the focus should be directed on their training and be given the necessary guidance and directions. According to the African Development Bank, Africa’s youth population is experiencing rapid growth and is projected to reach 850 million by the year 2050. Furthermore, young individuals in Africa are anticipated to make up half of the 2 billion working-age population by 2063 – the continent being the world’s youngest region with a median age of 25 years.
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Insights into the United Nations’ SDGs, as already stated, since its inception in 2015, there is still a lot to be done, especially in addressing the ongoing global challenges. Some notable facts included The number of people living in extreme poverty in 2022: 657-676 million vs. 581 million pre-COVID pandemic.
With steps to end hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture. One in 10 people worldwide are suffering from hunger. Nearly one in three people need regular access to food (2020).
Experts say that quality education and gender equality are progressing steadily, but it would take another 40 years for women and men to be represented equally in national political leadership.
Affordable and Clean Energy: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Progress in energy efficiency needs to speed up to achieve global climate goals.
Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure: In an assessment, there is still the necessity to build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation.
And the need to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. Issues persistent relating to climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. Climate Action: take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.
With partnerships for the goals: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalization of the global partnership for sustainable development. As Secretary-General António Guterres remarked on September 18 at the UN General Assembly, the SDGs need a global rescue, which includes stimulus support of at least “$500 billion a year as well as an effective debt-relief mechanism that supports payment suspensions, long lending terms and lower rates.”
Arguably, having a clearer understanding of these development goals is highly noteworthy. It would encourage global leaders to reassess current policies and practices and explore ways to enhance commitments towards their realization further.
BRICS, G20 and G77+China
Fundamentally, all these questions mentioned above and many others have predominantly featured during the past few years but have risen to greater heights recently during the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) meeting in Johannesburg, the G20 in New Delhi and G77+China summit in Cuba. At these high-level meetings, there were passionate appeals to rapidly address development gaps and disparities, to ‘change the game’s rules’ between the North and the South.
But then, those organizations (BRICS, G20, G77+China and others) are steadily recognizing the basic facts about global re-configuration, economic competitiveness and emerging new multifaceted relations between nation-states. Most of these states in the South, especially Africa is de-alienating away from some countries in the global North, entities further considered them as the primary sources of their under-development and causes for their internal conflicts, resulting in Economic deficiency.
In retrospect, BRICS held its 15th Summit in Johannesburg. There were two significant questions: first, new members joined the Group, and second, China rolled out another phase of industrial support program for Africa. It is noteworthy to say here that Russia and China are actively contributing to the transformation of the Group into a new geopolitical and economic block.
Noticeably, other key global powers are also scrambling to Africa. The dominating trend is that China, for instance, has, over the past two decades, demonstrated a sufficiently deep understanding of Africa’s Infrastructural development needs. In practical terms, China’s significant-scale contributions and active growing influence worry the most Developed nations of the world, especially the United States.
Quite recently, the G20 also held its traditional Summit in New Delhi. In spite of various divergent arguments during the Summit, however, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva strongly called for focusing on unity, rather than attempts to oppose the G7 group, and the G20 group. India also expressed concerns regarding the enlargement process, considering it a method to amplify the influence of China is the state with the largest economy in the Group.
“Therefore, the Brazilian presidency of the G20 has three priorities,” Luiz Lula told the meeting. “The first one is social inclusion and the fight against hunger, energy transition and sustainable development … and thirdly the reform of global governance institutions.” All these priorities are part of the Brazilian presidency’s motto: ‘Building a fair world and a sustainable planet.’ Two task forces will be created – the Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty and the Global Mobilization Against Climate Change.
In this context, India did powerfully and strategically well in controlling and leading groups from all camps to negotiate to have a unified compromise. BRICS leaders reached agreements around global debt, reforms to multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, climate financing and the adoption of a worldwide green development pact, with the latter two are expected to be critical features of the G20 presidency in 2024.
Records show that the G77+China, a group of developing and emerging countries representing 80 per cent of the world’s population, held its Summit in Cuba. Likewise, it was held amid widening geopolitical differences, the fight against climate change and solid calls for reforms of the global economic system. In short, it sought to “change the rules of the game” of the worldwide order.
“After all this time that the North has organized the world according to its interests, it is now up to the South to change the rules of the game,” Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said at the opening of the Summit.
Diaz-Canel said that developing nations were the primary victims of a “multidimensional crisis” in the world today, from “abusive, unequal trade” to global warming.
The G77+China bloc was established by 77 countries of the global South in 1964 “to articulate and promote their collective economic interests and enhance their joint negotiating capacity,” according to the Group’s website. Today, it has 134 members, among which the website lists China, although the Asian giant says it is not a full member. Cuba took over the rotating presidency in January.
Developing Nations’ Debt Trap
Far ahead of the New York meetings at the United Nations, academic researchers Vitor Gaspar, Marcos Poplawski-Ribeiro and Jiae Yoo have argued that global debt recorded another significant decline in 2022; it is still high, with debt sustainability remaining a concern. Referencing the Global Debt Database, the researchers made an explicit case that the total debt stood at 238 per cent of global gross domestic product last year, nine percentage points higher than in 2019.
In US dollar terms, debt amounted to $235 trillion, or $200 billion above its level in 2021. China played a central role in increasing global debt in recent decades as borrowing outpaced economic growth. Debt in low-income developing nations also rose significantly in the last two decades.
Several reports also note, with authenticity, that Africa’s debt to China surpassed $140 billion as of September 2021. However, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) says about $285 billion would be required by African countries to finance major infrastructural projects from 2021-2025. China has risen to become a top global lender with significant stakes that exceed more than five per cent of global Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
The COVID-19 pandemic’s economic effects and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have made it more difficult for many African states to pay their Debts. Now, 22 low-income African nations are either already experiencing a debt crisis or are at significant risk of experiencing it. In fact, the top 10 African states with the highest debt to China include Angola, Ethiopia, Zambia, Kenya, Nigeria, Cameroon, Sudan, DRC, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire.
In contrast, generally, more than half of low-income developing nations are in or at high risk of debt distress, and about one-fifth of emerging markets have sovereign bonds trading at distressed levels. Policymakers will need to be unwavering over the next few years in their commitment to preserving debt sustainability.
Some are advocating for genuine reforms at G20, suggesting further the possibility for well-refined and coordinated cooperation between the North and the South. Of course, a more excellent representation of the Global South would create a paradigm shift. For instance, Yaroslav Founder of BRICS+ Analytics Yaroslav Lissovolik argues that during the 15th BRICS in August, apart from the more excellent representation of Africa and the Global South in the G20 forum, another significance of AU’s admission to the Group of 20 is that it creates greater scope for synergies and closer cooperation between globalism (global institutions and platforms such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO, G20) and regionalism (regional integration blocs, regional development banks and regional financing arrangements). If other regional blocs do become part of the G20 platform, there will then be scope for these blocs to work more closely with the WTO, while regional development institutions could coordinate their operations with the IMF and the World Bank.
With the world facing a challenging economy, geopolitical tensions, and the deepening effects of the climate and nature crises, achieving the SDG targets set out in 2015 currently needs to be on track. According to the UN, progress on more than 50% of the targets must be more substantial, stalled, or backsliding. The private and civil sectors must play a key role, alongside governments, in supporting and accelerating sustainable Development.
“To achieve the SDG targets by 2030, significant innovative efforts are still required,” said Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum. “Through the Sustainable Development Impact Meetings, which bring together governments, business and civil society, we aim to make a tangible contribution to creating a more sustainable, inclusive and resilient world.”
In the course of writing this article and reading through the UN General Assembly reports, one thought appeared that after decades of restrictive IMF and World Bank loans, poverty, hunger, and conflict persist throughout the continent. While many attribute this to Africa’s governance challenges, in reality, a deliberate imperial agenda has also hindered the continent’s Development in the political, economic, and security sectors.
The rise of a new global pole to challenge the old unipolar order has had a notable impact across sub-Saharan West Africa, which, in recent years, has seen a surge in military coups, shifting power away from regimes that had long prioritized the interests of Western corporations. These coups occurred in Chad (April 2021), Mali (May 2021), Guinea (September 2021), Sudan (October 2021), Burkina Faso (January 2022), Niger (July 2023), and Gabon (August 2023) – all very resource-rich but with abnormally poor living conditions. These African states have to pursue development-oriented policies to uplift their vigorous status out of abject poverty.
Therefore, it is commendable that participants at UNGA in New York have critically reviewed a series of carefully curated discussions to advance work on specific areas of the 17 SDGs. The robust programme includes key areas such as accelerating the reskilling revolution, harnessing artificial intelligence for better jobs, improving access to nutrition, advancing the energy transition, responding to the climate and nature crises, supporting the social economy, advancing gender equality, and promoting digital and data-driven health.
Admittedly, we are in a highly critical period. There are many obstacles to Africa’s political stability, economic development and integration, and building trust and credibility. One major success was the African Union’s ascension into G20, giving it a louder voice. But that’s not all to it; AU needs to sort out the potential controversies and contradictions in the geopolitical landscape. Alternative to the rules-based order, BRICS and its new members, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, have extensive interests across Africa, prioritizing Africa Agenda 2063 without vacillating the pendulum.
In a modest conclusion of this discussion, African leaders have to face the existing challenges and emerging opportunities within the context of geopolitical changes. In addressing these, African leaders need to understand that the current developments in Africa have pronounced hyperbolic anti-colonial and anti-western rhetorics that threaten the logical appeal for technological transfer and external financial support for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Therefore, African leaders have to acknowledge humbleness while putting order first in their own homes in terms of reforming the political system, uprooting deep-seated corruption, working towards good governance, transparency and accountability, and rules of law as well as ensuring the effectiveness of institutions of power. From the pragmatic perspective of new diplomacy, it is crucial to underline that there should be a geopolitical balance of power rather than uttermost accusations and outright confrontation in the emerging multipolar world.
Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University of Russia. He is an expert at the Roscongress Foundation and the Valdai Discussion Club.
As an academic researcher and economist with a keen interest in current geopolitical changes and the emerging world order, Maurice Okoli frequently contributes articles for publication in reputable media portals on different aspects of the interconnection between developing and developed countries, particularly in Asia, Africa and Europe. With comments and suggestions, he can be reached via email: markolconsult (at) gmail (dot) com
By Sani Abdulrazak, PhD
The fundamentality of securing our lives and property, especially in Northern Nigeria, cannot be overemphasised. Any other responsibility comes after this for a responsible government. Sadly, for close to two decades, Northern Nigeria has been a gallows of despair, rape, and death. From banditry and freelance killings that scratch, pierce, and are ruining the North West, to the bloody insurgency that barks and bites in the North East, to farmers-herder conflicts in the North Central, leaving behind a scorching trail of rancour and sorrow of unimaginable proportion for millions, Kaduna State was one of the worst-hit states in terms of banditry and kidnappings, ethno-religious conflicts, and freelance killings.
But in the last three years, the state has metamorphosed into one of the most peaceful in the region via the Kaduna Peace Model. More so, the recent endorsement of the Kaduna Peace Model by the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) deserves thoughtful examination rather than unquestioning acceptance. HURIWA’s position has brought renewed attention to Kaduna State’s approach to conflict management and peacebuilding. The endorsement raises an important policy question: Has Kaduna developed a governance model capable of reducing conflict in a sustainable manner, and if so, why have other northern states not moved to adapt it? These questions deserve answers rooted in facts rather than political loyalties.
The phrase “Kaduna Peace Model” does not point to or refer to a single law, policy document, or institutional framework. Rather, it describes an evolving approach that combines conventional security operations with community engagement, dialogue among stakeholders, collaboration with traditional and religious institutions, support for security agencies, conflict mediation, and development interventions in communities affected by violence. Instead of relying exclusively on military responses, the approach seeks to address some of the social and political conditions that often sustain insecurity. Whether this amounts to a distinct governance model remains open to debate. Nevertheless, it reflects a broader understanding that lasting peace requires more than the deployment of armed personnel. Security may suppress violence temporarily, but durable peace depends equally on trust, inclusion, justice, and economic opportunity.
The next question is unavoidable: Has the approach worked?
The evidence suggests that Kaduna today presents a different security picture from that of three years ago, although not an entirely peaceful one. Around 2023, the state remained one of Nigeria’s most violence-affected regions. Conflict trackers documented frequent attacks, kidnappings, and communal violence, with 85 recorded conflict incidents resulting in 261 fatalities in the final quarter of 2023 alone. Entire communities lived under constant fear, farming activities were disrupted in several local government areas, and many roads within the state became synonymous with insecurity.
Recent years, however, indicate a significant degree of improvement in almost all parts of the state. Some communities have resumed agricultural activities, commercial movement has improved along previously troubled corridors, and government engagement with local communities has become more visible. These developments suggest that violence has, in almost all areas of the state, reduced in intensity. Yet such observations should not be mistaken for a declaration of victory.
A meaningful assessment, however, goes beyond casualty figures alone. It must also consider whether displaced persons have returned home, whether schools operate without interruption, whether farmers cultivate their lands without fear, whether markets function normally, and whether citizens genuinely perceive improvements in their daily security. Peace, as we know it, is not merely the absence of gunfire; it is the restoration of ordinary life.
It is within this context that HURIWA’s endorsement should be understood.
Civil society organisations play an important role in recognising promising governance practices, encouraging innovation, and stimulating public debate. Their endorsements can influence policy conversations and encourage governments to learn from one another. However, endorsements are neither official certifications nor substitutes for independent evaluation. Every governance model, regardless of who praises it, must remain open to scrutiny, evidence, and continuous improvement.
The larger question, therefore, is whether the Kaduna experience can be replicated elsewhere across Northern Nigeria.
It is a fact that certain principles underlying the Kaduna approach are broadly applicable. Community dialogue, cooperation between government and traditional institutions, investment in local peacebuilding, and stronger collaboration with security agencies are strategies that have relevance beyond Kaduna’s borders. But due to the non-uniformity and complexity of the hydra-headed nature of insecurity across Northern Nigeria, it becomes almost impossible for the model to work across the whole of Northern Nigeria. The security dynamics of Kaduna differ from those of Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto, Niger, Benue, Plateau, or Borno. Banditry, communal conflicts, terrorism, farmer-herder disputes, and transnational criminal networks vary significantly in their causes and manifestations. A strategy that succeeds in one environment cannot simply be copied into another without adjustment.
This probably explains why other northern governors have not simply adopted what is popularly described as the Kaduna Peace Model. Effective governance is context-specific. Every state possesses different demographic realities, institutional capacities, historical grievances, and security challenges. Replication without adaptation risks producing disappointing outcomes. If northern states are to draw lessons from Kaduna’s experience, several adjustments are necessary. Independent conflict assessments should precede policy adoption. Local governments must become stronger partners in peacebuilding. Traditional and religious leaders should be integrated into structured dialogue mechanisms rather than informal consultations alone. Reliable security data should guide decision-making, while transparent monitoring systems should measure outcomes beyond political narratives. Economic recovery, youth employment, and access to justice must complement security interventions if peace is to endure.
Despite its widely acknowledged contributions to reducing insecurity and fostering dialogue over the past three years, the Kaduna Peace Model is not without significant shortcomings. One of its most notable weaknesses is the absence of a clearly documented framework that defines its philosophy, guiding principles, operational structure, implementation strategy, monitoring indicators, and evaluation mechanisms. Consequently, much of what is described as the “Kaduna Peace Model” exists in practice rather than in a codified, replicable document, making independent assessment, institutional continuity, and adaptation by other jurisdictions difficult. Furthermore, the model remains heavily dependent on the commitment of the incumbent political leadership, raising concerns about its sustainability beyond the current administration. While it has contributed to stabilising many communities, it has yet to comprehensively address the underlying structural drivers of conflict, including competition over natural resources and historical grievances, and questions persist regarding transparency, measurable performance indicators, accountability, and the extent of participation by women, youth, victims, and other marginalised groups. These limitations suggest that although the model has demonstrated practical value, its long-term effectiveness would be strengthened through formal documentation, institutionalisation, a robust implementation framework, and regular independent evaluation.
Possibly the greatest lesson from Kaduna is not that it has discovered a perfect formula for peace. No society has. Rather, it demonstrates that conflict management increasingly demands governance approaches that extend beyond military deployments alone. Therefore, HURIWA’s endorsement should not be viewed as the conclusion of the conversation but as its beginning. Whether the Kaduna Peace Model becomes a genuine reference point for other states will depend less on public commendation than on rigorous evidence, independent evaluation, and its ability to produce durable improvements in the lives of ordinary citizens.
In governance, therefore, the true measure of peace is not the number of endorsements the Kaduna Peace Model receives. It is the number of lives it has protected, the communities restored, and the confidence with which citizens wake each morning believing that tomorrow will be safer than yesterday.
Sani Abdulrazak, PhD, is a writer, researcher and public affairs analyst based in Zaria, Kaduna State
Feature/OPED
$40bn Net Reserves, Record Wealth, Relentless Poverty: Who Is Nigeria’s Economy Serving Today?
By Blaise Udunze
No doubt, it was a welcome announcement that Nigeria’s net foreign exchange (FX) reserves have surged by an astonishing 1,233 per cent from about $3 billion to over $40 billion. This would ordinarily be the kind of economic milestone that inspires optimism, coupled with gross external reserves of about $52.52 billion, which are sufficient to finance roughly 11 months of imports of goods and services. Penultimate week, the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Olayemi Cardoso, presented the development at the end of the 306th meeting of the apex bank’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) as evidence that its reforms are working.
It is no surprise that around the same period, one would say that another important economic event occurred with the government sharing more money than ever before with the federal, state, and local governments, as the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) distributed a record N2.55 trillion, representing an increase of N250 billion over the N2.3 trillion shared in the preceding month.
Of course, the official figures are impressive numbers. Yes, anyone would conclude that the economy is becoming stronger, more stable and better positioned for growth. While this suggests stronger public finances, it also raises the question of whether these larger allocations are producing tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary Nigerians. More interesting is that another set of figures tells a completely different story.
According to the World Bank’s newly approved Country Partnership Framework for Nigeria, 61 per cent of Nigerians now live below the poverty line, while about 79 per cent are either poor or vulnerable to falling into poverty. More than 139 million Nigerians live below the poverty line. Over 86 million people lack access to electricity, while millions of young Nigerians enter the labour market every year with little prospect of decent employment.
The contradiction could not be starker. If reserves are rising, government revenues are increasing, and governments at all levels are receiving record allocations, why are the lives of ordinary Nigerians becoming more difficult?
This is the question policymakers must answer not with statistics, but with tangible improvements in the lives of citizens. If government agencies engineering these figures must know, these are not merely economic statistics; they are the lived realities by which citizens judge any government.
Foreign exchange reserves are not an economic trophy. They are a means to an end. Strong reserves are expected to stabilise the currency, reassure investors, strengthen the country’s ability to withstand external shocks and create an enabling environment for investment, production and employment.
But reserves alone do not feed families nor would they reduce their housing rents. They do not lower transport fares. They do not reduce school fees. They do not make healthcare affordable. Nor do they automatically create jobs.
Ultimately, this is to say that the success of macroeconomic reforms must be measured not by the strength of the CBN’s balance sheet but by the wellbeing of the Nigerian people.
Historically, unlike our dear country, countries that consistently build substantial foreign exchange reserves do so on the back of strong economic fundamentals. The fact is that they maintain sustained trade surpluses, export diversified products, attract large volumes of long-term foreign direct investment (FDI), develop globally competitive manufacturing industries and continuously improve productivity.
Nigeria, unfortunately, still struggles on nearly all these fronts. The country’s export earnings remain overwhelmingly dependent on crude oil. Non-oil exports remain relatively insignificant. Value-added manufacturing exports are weak. Another area that raises concern is agriculture, which continues to export mostly raw commodities rather than higher-value processed products despite being known previously as the country’s mainstay. With all these so-called developments, Nigeria still imports refined petroleum products, machinery, pharmaceuticals, industrial inputs and even food that could be produced locally.
This naturally raises an uncomfortable but legitimate question that requires an answer. Yes, it would be necessary to ask: How exactly has Nigeria grown and accumulated over $40 billion in net foreign exchange reserves without the structural fundamentals that typically support such reserve growth?
The apex bank has continued to credit exchange-rate reforms, improved transparency, stronger investor confidence and increased diaspora remittances. Well, it would be said that these achievements deserve recognition.
However, they do not completely explain the scale or, more importantly, the sustainability of the reserve accumulation.
Nigeria has not consistently recorded the large trade surpluses associated with countries that rapidly accumulate reserves. Oil production remains below historical capacity. Export diversification remains limited. Ease of doing business continues to be constrained by multiple taxation, infrastructure deficits, insecurity, policy uncertainty, logistics bottlenecks and unreliable electricity.
Without addressing these structural deficiencies, reserve accumulation risks becoming more financial than productive.
Equally important is the question of foreign direct investment. Governor Cardoso has argued that improved macroeconomic stability is attracting foreign investors. That may well be true. But confidence alone does not build factories.
The real question is how much fresh FDI has actually entered Nigeria’s productive sectors? How much has gone into manufacturing? How much into agro-processing? How much into export-oriented industries capable of generating sustainable foreign exchange earnings and creating jobs?
If reserve growth is being driven largely by short-term portfolio investments attracted by high interest rates rather than long-term productive investment, then Nigeria remains vulnerable. Portfolio investors can exit as quickly as they entered whenever global financial conditions change.
The unarguable fact is that foreign direct investment, by contrast, creates factories, expands production, develops supply chains and creates lasting employment. Nigeria desperately needs more of the latter.
The CBN also points to diaspora remittances as a growing source of reserve accumulation, projecting inflows of approximately $1 billion every month before the end of the year. Again, this is encouraging.
Again, the country will not be tired of asking questions because several of these questions deserve closer examination. How much of these remittances represent genuinely new inflows rather than funds previously routed through informal channels? Come to think of it, how much of these remittances finance productive investments instead of household consumption? Can diaspora remittances realistically become a permanent substitute for export competitiveness?
No economy has ever industrialised on remittances alone. A nation cannot sustainably depend on the sacrifices of its citizens abroad while failing to create opportunities for them at home.
Beyond the reserve figures lies another troubling contradiction. This is more disturbing because every month, FAAC distributes unprecedented sums to governments across Nigeria. Yet again, with daily regret, the average Nigerian struggles with deteriorating public services.
Honestly speaking, it has become so frustrating that the majority of the people who yearn for pleasant or attractive experiences are struggling as roads remain poor, public hospitals remain overstretched, schools continue to decline, electricity remains unreliable, water infrastructure remains inadequate, and youth unemployment remains widespread. Worst still, think of the cases as the nation continues to grapple with rising inflation, worsening poverty, declining purchasing power, struggling businesses and persistent insecurity.
One major contradiction is that if revenues continue rising while poverty deepens, then one unavoidable question must be asked: Where is the money going? Another pertinent question: How can the citizens be surrounded by water and still suffer from thirst or soap lather in their eyes?
This has been the predominant worry in the minds of many even as the World Bank itself acknowledges this disconnect. While praising recent macroeconomic reforms for improving fiscal stability, strengthening foreign reserves and restoring investor confidence, it concludes emphatically that the gains have not translated into meaningful improvements in living standards.
Ironically, despite the claims of declining inflation, it continues to erode purchasing power. Social protection remains weak. Most Nigerians remain trapped in low-productivity informal employment.
One contradicting and astonishing step taken recently is nowhere more evident than in the Central Bank’s monetary policy. Consider this: despite a marginal decline in headline inflation to 15.91 per cent in June 2026, the Monetary Policy Committee retained the benchmark Monetary Policy Rate (MPR) at 26.5 per cent, alongside a 45 per cent Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) for commercial banks.
The decision reflects understandable caution. The CBN remains concerned that escalating geopolitical tensions in the Middle East could increase global energy prices, worsen imported inflation and reverse recent gains in price stability.
From a monetary policy perspective, this caution is defensible. But from the standpoint of businesses and households, the consequences are profound. An interest rate of 26.5 per cent inevitably translates into prohibitively expensive bank lending.
The ripple and adverse effects have led to manufacturers struggling to finance expansion. Another tough aspect is seeing the small and medium-sized enterprises, the backbone of employment generation, find access to affordable credit increasingly difficult. Entrepreneurs postpone investments. Factories delay expansion. Potential employers reduce hiring. Economic growth slows.
Ironically, while it is understandable that high interest rates may help stabilise inflation and attract foreign portfolio inflows that support reserves, it should be made known that they simultaneously suppress domestic investment, production and job creation.
In other words, the same policies helping strengthen the country’s macroeconomic indicators may also be constraining the real economy. Even the celebrated decline in inflation deserves closer scrutiny.
The national inflation rate may have eased marginally to 15.91 per cent, but this national average masks severe hardship across much of the country, which continues to create perpetual pain.
How best can this be figured out if data from the National Bureau of Statistics show that 19 states and the Federal Capital Territory recorded inflation rates exceeding 30 per cent, with Niger State above 42 percent and Kogi State exceeding 41 per cent?
Food inflation continues to rise, driven by increases in the prices of tomatoes, pepper, beef, yams, garri and other staple foods.
Businesses themselves remain unconvinced. The Organised Private Sector has welcomed the marginal moderation in inflation but insists that prices remain painfully high for both consumers and businesses.
Leaders of small business associations argue that market realities tell a different story from headline statistics. For millions of Nigerians, inflation is not measured by percentages. It is measured by empty shopping baskets. By reduced meal portions. By businesses shutting their doors. By families withdrawing children from school. By postponed medical treatments.
From a theoretical standpoint, macroeconomic stability is undoubtedly necessary. Without it, sustainable development is impossible. But it would also be agreed that macroeconomic stability alone is not sufficient. It can be argued further that economic reforms must eventually improve household incomes, reduce poverty, expand productive employment and raise living standards.
Otherwise, they risk becoming reforms that look impressive in economic reports but remain invisible in everyday life.
The truth remains that with the current situation, Nigeria therefore stands at a critical pivotal moment and the decisions taken now will determine its future.
The current reserve position should not become a destination for celebration but a foundation for deeper structural transformation. The country must diversify exports beyond crude oil. Strengthen manufacturing. Promote value-added agricultural exports. Improve electricity supply. Reduce the cost of doing business. Expand logistics infrastructure. Attract long-term productive investment.
In addition, support local industries with affordable financing. Strengthen institutions. Improve governance and ensure greater accountability for public spending. Only then will rising reserves translate into rising prosperity. Only then will record FAAC allocations produce visible development. Only then will macroeconomic stability become household stability.
The ultimate measure of economic success is not the number of dollars held in the Central Bank’s vaults. It is whether parents can afford school fees and housing rent. Whether young graduates can find decent jobs. Whether businesses can borrow, produce and expand. Whether families can afford food without sacrificing nutrition. Whether citizens feel that economic growth includes them.
Until those questions receive positive answers, one uncomfortable question will continue to linger. Who Is Nigeria’s Economy Serving Today?
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: bl***********@***il.com
By Henry Obiekea
Nigeria’s banking industry is entering one of the most significant transformation periods since the 2005 banking consolidation exercise. The Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) ongoing recapitalisation programme is more than a regulatory requirement—it is a strategic investment in the country’s financial future. If implemented successfully, it has the potential to strengthen financial stability, deepen credit access, improve investor confidence, and support a more inclusive and resilient economy.
In March 2024, the CBN announced new minimum capital requirements for commercial, merchant and non-interest banks. Under the new framework, international commercial banks are required to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of ₦500 billion, national commercial banks ₦200 billion, and regional commercial banks ₦50 billion. Merchant banks are required to hold ₦50 billion, while national and regional non-interest banks are required to maintain ₦20 billion and ₦10 billion respectively. The policy reflects the realities of today’s economy, where inflation, currency depreciation and expanding financial demands have significantly altered the capital required to support sustainable banking operations.
Many institutions have responded through rights issues, public offers, private placements, mergers and acquisitions in pursuit of the revised capital requirements. Beyond regulatory compliance, the exercise is already encouraging stronger governance, better capital planning and increased investor participation within Nigeria’s financial markets.
The recapitalisation conversation, however, extends beyond deposit money banks. The CBN has also introduced revised capital requirements for microfinance banks, recognising the critical role they play in extending financial services to underserved individuals, nano businesses and small enterprises. As the financial landscape becomes increasingly digital, stronger capital bases will enable these institutions to invest in technology, cybersecurity, risk management and product innovation while maintaining public confidence.
For Nigeria’s rapidly growing fintech ecosystem, although they are subject to different licensing frameworks depending on their operations, the broader regulatory direction is equally clear. Institutions that facilitate payments, tech-enabled banking, lending and savings are expected to maintain governance, capital and consumer protection standards appropriate to their respective licensing frameworks. This evolution is essential as fintechs continue to account for a growing share of financial transactions and provide services to millions of previously underserved Nigerians. Collectively, these reforms present a unique opportunity to reshape Nigeria’s financial ecosystem.
A stronger banking sector creates stronger economic outcomes. Well-capitalised financial institutions are better positioned to finance infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture, housing and technology. They possess greater capacity to absorb economic shocks, support long-term lending and withstand periods of market volatility. More importantly, they can extend larger volumes of prudently underwritten credit to businesses that create jobs and stimulate economic growth.
For small and medium-sized enterprises, which contribute significantly to Nigeria’s GDP and employment, improved access to financing remains one of the greatest growth enablers. Recapitalisation should not be assessed solely by stronger balance sheets, but also by the extent to which additional capital supports productive economic activity.
Despite remarkable progress over the last decade, millions of Nigerians remain underserved by formal financial institutions. Expanding financial inclusion requires complementary approaches across commercial banks, microfinance banks, fintechs and other regulated financial institutions. Achieving meaningful inclusion requires collaboration across commercial banks, microfinance banks, fintech companies and regulators. Each institution serves different customer segments, yet all contribute towards a common objective: bringing more Nigerians into the formal financial system.
At FairMoney Microfinance Bank, recapitalisation aligns with our continued investment in responsible lending, digital banking capabilities, sound risk management and financial inclusion. We believe technology can complement prudent credit assessment and help extend access to financial services for eligible individuals and businesses.
As the recapitalisation programme progresses, success should ultimately be measured by broader outcomes: stronger institutions, deeper financial inclusion, increased SME financing, enhanced consumer confidence and sustained economic growth. Capital itself does not transform economies; how that capital is deployed does.
The Federal Government and the Central Bank of Nigeria have introduced reforms aimed at strengthening the long-term resilience of the financial sector. Continued implementation of these reforms will be important in supporting financial stability and sustainable sector growth. These decisions require vision, consistency and regulatory discipline. While the adjustment process may present short-term challenges for some institutions, the long-term benefits for financial stability, investor confidence and economic development far outweigh the costs.
Nigeria possesses one of Africa’s most dynamic financial services sectors. With stronger capital foundations, responsible innovation and continued collaboration between regulators and financial institutions, the country is well positioned to build a banking ecosystem capable of supporting its development ambitions, empowering millions more individuals and businesses, and supporting inclusive economic development over the long term.
Henry Obiekea is the Managing Director of FairMoney Microfinance Bank
