Shortly after taking office on May 29, Nigerian President Bola Tinubu surprised many observers by implementing a series of bold reforms. In addition to scrapping costly fuel subsidies and various taxes, he suspended the country’s central bank governor, which led to the immediately removing trading restrictions that propped up the value of the naira. To curry favor with Nigeria’s huge population of young people, Tinubu introduced interest-free loans to help students fund higher education.
However, while these rapid reforms signal Tinubu’s adherence to economic orthodoxy and might restore the confidence of Nigerians, international investors and financial markets in the short term, by themselves they would not affect lasting change.
Nigeria’s economy — Africa’s largest — is in dire straits, and transforming it would not be easy. Inflation hit an 18-year high, and large fiscal deficits are adding to already-soaring debt levels. The economy has been hit hard by the fallout from the war in Ukraine, partly because Nigeria depends on food imports, but also because the country — despite being Africa’s biggest oil producer — is largely incapable of refining crude and thus imports petroleum. Mismanagement, security issues, and underinvestment in infrastructure have hobbled the oil industry, which generates about 80 percent of government revenues, while inconsistent official policies have prevented the agriculture sector, which employs about a third of Nigerians, from reaching its full potential.
That said, Tinubu’s move away from interventionism is a step in the right direction, and he could further harness the demographic potential of Africa’s most populous country by securing international investments and reducing bureaucratic red tape. Most importantly, Tinubu would need to address broader security, energy, and governance challenges, which are often intertwined.
Security risks, which largely preoccupied Tinubu’s predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, threaten to derail the push for rapid reforms, but a growing economy could deter would-be militants from taking up arms by creating employment opportunities, especially if Tinubu can root out corruption, prevent monopolization, and reform the security sector.
Nigeria’s oil-sector woes should also be a priority. The fuel-subsidy reform would help restore fiscal discipline, given that Nigeria’s state-owned oil company spent US$10 billion on subsidizing gasoline in 2022. Moreover, Aliko Dangote’s US$20 billion oil refinery, where production is set to begin this month, could help reduce the country’s dependence on petroleum imports, assuming that it does not become a private monopoly.
Tinubu has demonstrated little patience for firms cornering the market. While the monopolization of exports has typically been the focus of government regulation, import monopolies in oil-rich countries such as Nigeria are also a significant obstacle to economic diversification and must be addressed. (It is worth noting that Tinubu suspended Nigeria’s anti-corruption head for “abuse of office,” although previous agency leaders have also been removed after facing similar allegations.)
To diversify the economy in the long term, the government would need to expand access to electricity, which only about 55 percent of Nigerians have. Fortunately, the potential for clean energy is enormous. Development partners such as the World Bank can help with funding and guarantees to boost private investment in electricity distribution and renewables, but Tinubu’s team would first need to improve the governance of the electricity sector, ensure a stable macroeconomic framework, and establish a conducive financial system.
Nigeria’s vibrant tech ecosystem illustrates the potential that Tinubu could unlock. Hundreds of startups have emerged, particularly in the fintech sector, with Nigeria accounting for five of Africa’s seven tech “unicorns” (private startups with a valuation of at least US$1 billion). The multiple-exchange-rate regime that prevailed prior to Tinubu taking office drained foreign reserves and gave importers an unfair advantage. Fewer exchange-rate restrictions would facilitate financial inflows, to the benefit of startups, which could in turn help transform the agriculture and transport sectors and empower millions of Nigerians.
If Tinubu stays the course on energy, security and governance reforms, his agenda could ultimately benefit all of Africa — much like Saudi Arabia’s economic experiment could transform the Middle East.
However, unlike the Saudis, the Nigerian government does not have vast coffers to draw from and would need to rely more heavily on foreign and domestic private investment, coupled with the support of development partners. If given enough backing, Tinubu could remake the country — and even help remake the continent.
Rabah Arezki, a director of research at the French National Center for Scientific Research, is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Studies and Research on International Development and Harvard Kennedy School.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS