Nigeria is a country so unwieldy in its size, and so complex in its politics and structures, that it necessitates a certain level of assumption, together with an understanding of the detail of its interlinking internal dynamics. Its diversity and influence demand a nuanced engagement; its scale necessitates a broad-brush and bold approach.

In recent months Nigeria has been making international headlines because of its security challenges, in particular its new terrorist threat from Boko Haram, which bombed the United Nations building in Abuja in August. For those focusing on security in Nigeria, the outlook is bleak. But speak to someone from the Lagos business community and they, though cognisant of the challenges, brim with optimism about the future. However gloomy on paper, Nigeria is a kaleidoscope of ever-shifting challenges and opportunities and defies characterisations of a lost cause.

Maiduguri, the city upon which Boko Haram-related terrorism is concentrated, sees almost daily shootings and assassinations. Unfortunately for President Goodluck Jonathan, an opportunity to counter and reduce the Boko Haram issue was missed in 2009 when its leader Mohammed Yusuf was captured, but then killed in custody. Since then, Boko Haram appears to have transitioned from a geographically-unified group based in Maiduguri to one that is more diffuse and amorphous in structure, making it much harder to understand and deal with.

Also unfortunately for President Jonathan, security and especially how he deals with the problem of terrorism are being seen as a key test of his credibility as leader of Africa's biggest democracy. However, the resolution to Nigeria's seemingly growing security threats and outbreaks of localised violence does not lie in tackling these problems with force or increasing the number of soldiers on the streets. The threat Boko Haram presents, like the ugly fighting that has recurred in Jos, capital of Nigeria's scenic "Home of Peace and Tourism" Plateau State, is symptomatic of decades of declining governance and increasingly tangible tensions articulated in religious and ethnic difference.

Nigeria is a crowded country; no one really knows how big it is, but the population probably stands at around 155 million. It is expected to grow to around 220 million long before 2020. Competition for resources is thus fierce, and the majority lead a precarious existence. Defining a nation comprised of great diversity has always been a priority and a challenge for Nigeria's leaders. The president and the country's state governors need urgently to quell the rhetoric and tensions that threaten the fabric of Nigerian society and further and even uglier violence.

The president has opportunities to do this and at the same time tackle the problems of corruption and criminality. Given Nigeria's political complexity and the fierce competition for resources, federal and state governments are limited in the number of battles they can fight - and win - at any one time. But for the current administration there are three battles that if fought and won for the benefit of the nation could be transformative for Nigeria. And it is these opportunities that the international community can get behind and support.

The first of these opportunities is improving and expanding Nigeria's agricultural sector - just after independence the country fed itself from its own production. According to Nigeria's Central Bank Governor, in 2010 Nigeria spent one billion dollars on importing rice. Providing employment to about sixty to seventy percent of the population, better access to finance, storage for produce and vastly improved rural infrastructure could dramatically improve the lives of rural Nigerians and shift the balance of the country's economy - damagingly reliant on revenue from crude oil. Nigeria has in recent years seen some improvements in agriculture and the current Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development will need backing to see his plans through.

The second battle worth expending political capital on is the removal of Nigeria's costly and corrupting fuel subsidies, but this is one of the most contentious and delicate issues the government confronts. Despite being sub-Saharan Africa's biggest oil producer, Nigeria imports most of the refined petroleum products it consumes - around 85 percent. The country's four refineries do not function at capacity and could not meet demand if they did.

The idea behind the subsidy - to keep fuel cheap at the point of sale to the ordinary consumer, regardless of location in the country - makes sense: without an adequately functioning power sector, people rely on generators and access to fuel. But more government money is spent on subsidising fuel importation and distribution than is spent on health and education. Over seven billion dollars will reportedly be spent on importing fuel in 2011. Unfortunately, much of this money does not benefit ordinary Nigerians, and is instead funnelled off during the lengthy import process. Former President Yar'Adua was candid about the long-term impacts of the subsidy: "There is a very strong cartel in this country that is benefitting from the issue of subsidies and it has introduced colossal corruption within the system."

However, news in Nigeria that the government plans to remove the subsidy in 2012 has caused great consternation. It may be a decision that will ultimately benefit the country as a whole - but for now people are concerned about near term increases in the cost of their fuel and small businesses fear being crippled by price hikes. People do not trust government promises to fully and successfully deregulate the downstream sector and reinvest money saved in infrastructure development. The government may face major protests across the country if people do not feel any sense of participation in this process and see a damaging increase in the cost of their diesel.

Added to current security concerns, widespread violent protest could overstretch Nigeria's security services. President Jonathan needs to employ all of the resources at his disposal - the media, state and local authorities and especially traditional and religious leaders - if he is to communicate his intentions adequately and convince Nigerians that this will benefit them in the end.

The third transformative step that needs to be completed - and for which, if successful, Goodluck Jonathan and his team will long be remembered in a positive light - is the reform of the power sector. Roughly 45 percent of Nigeria's population has access to power, and according to African Development Bank figures, of that percentage, only thirty percent of demand is being met. While power sector reform is not as thorny an issue as the removal of the fuel subsidy, it is also not straightforward as it involves the unbundling and privatisation of the component companies of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria, the labour force of which is concerned about job security, pay and conditions. Successful reform of the sector - requiring as much emphasis on transmission as on generation and distribution - would be tantamount to an economic revolution in the country and would go some way to reducing the seemingly expanding disparities in wealth and opportunity across the country. It could therefore ultimately serve to undermine the divisive rhetoric that negatively exploits the nation's diversity.

While crucial, successful delivery on the issues mentioned above is far from guaranteed. There are powerful parties with vested interests for whom such extreme changes are unwelcome. The president will need to protect key members of his team, such as the Central Bank Governor and Ministers of Power, Finance and Agriculture - and he will need to smooth things over and help manage relationships with those whose toes are being heavily trod on. He will need the support of the 36 state governors, who together make up an influential bloc on national matters. And he will need to convince Nigerians that coming changes are intended to benefit the nation and are not just the result of politicians "playing games in Abuja."

So policymakers and observers in and outside Nigeria should be concerned and interested: localised violence and the new terrorist threat should be taken very seriously and are deeply damaging to people's lives in the places they are focused. But these problems are not rooted in single or simple causes, and the solutions will not come solely with security responses. Nigeria's federal and state governments have three years to secure a few far-reaching reforms. Nigerians could see gradual positive change in their lives, if the right steps are taken in Abuja and their state capitals. The alternative is the attrition of those elements of state and society that have held Nigeria together for more than fifty years - something neither Nigerians nor the international community can afford.

(Elizabeth Donnelly is the Programme Manager with the Africa Programme at Chatham House.)

 

 

 

Copyright 2011, The World Today