By Chuks Oyema-Aziken
President Bola Tinubu came into office with enormous expectations and a promise to renew hope. He inherited a nation facing economic hardship, declining revenues, mounting debt, infrastructure deficits and widespread insecurity.
While many Nigerians expected quick solutions, the realities he met in office were far more complicated than most people imagined.
One reason I pity the President is that he arrived with what appeared to be a genuine determination to reform the economy, only to discover that many of Nigeria’s challenges are deeply rooted and decades in the making. No president can reverse such problems within a few months or even a few years.
He inherited an economy heavily dependent on oil revenues. For years, governments at all levels relied on monthly allocations from crude oil earnings, while other productive sectors struggled to reach their full potential. The result was a country that became overly dependent on government spending.
Many Nigerians grew accustomed to an economy where the end of every month was marked by the distribution of salaries, allowances and government allocations. Wealth creation through manufacturing, exports, agriculture and innovation often took a back seat to sharing available revenues.
The President also inherited the burden of fuel subsidies. For years, subsidy payments consumed trillions of naira that could have gone into roads, schools, hospitals and power infrastructure. Yet removing the subsidy was always going to be politically difficult because of its immediate impact on citizens.
The foreign exchange crisis presented another major obstacle. Multiple exchange rates, declining dollar inflows and pressure on foreign reserves had distorted the economy long before the current administration took office. Efforts to reform the system inevitably produced short-term pain.
As prices rose and inflation worsened, many Nigerians directed their frustration at the current government. While this reaction is understandable, it also reflects the reality that today’s leaders are often blamed for problems accumulated over many years.
The security situation has created an even greater challenge. Across different parts of the country, communities continue to face threats from terrorists, bandits, kidnappers and other criminal groups. Despite military operations and security interventions, attacks still occur, creating fear and uncertainty among citizens.
Many Nigerians, including supporters of the President, believe that some aspects of the worsening insecurity are political in nature. They argue that certain actors may be exploiting security challenges to weaken confidence in the government or advance their own interests. The President himself has on several occasions suggested that some individuals benefit from instability and do not want reforms to succeed.
Whether or not every security challenge can be linked to politics, there is no doubt that insecurity remains one of the greatest tests facing the administration. The loss of lives, displacement of communities and disruption of economic activities continue to place enormous pressure on government.
The difficulty for President Tinubu is that insecurity is often judged solely by outcomes. Citizens want peace and safety, regardless of the complexities behind security operations. Every attack raises questions about the effectiveness of government efforts.
Yet security experts frequently point out that many of the threats confronting Nigeria developed over decades. Criminal networks, illegal arms trafficking, porous borders and local conflicts cannot be dismantled overnight.
Against this backdrop, the administration has continued to advocate structural reforms, including renewed discussions on state policing. Proponents argue that decentralizing certain aspects of policing could improve intelligence gathering and response times.
The government has also supported the establishment of regional development commissions aimed at addressing the unique developmental challenges facing different parts of the country. The goal is to promote balanced growth and reduce some of the conditions that fuel instability.
Supporters of these initiatives believe that development and security are closely linked. Communities with jobs, infrastructure and opportunities are generally less vulnerable to criminal recruitment and social unrest.
However, introducing reforms is one thing; implementing them successfully is another. The President must navigate political opposition, bureaucratic resistance and public impatience while trying to deliver results.
This is why I pity him. Every difficult decision carries consequences. If he maintains old policies, he is accused of lacking courage. If he introduces reforms, he is blamed for the hardship that often accompanies change.
He is expected to fix an economy built on oil dependence, reform a distorted foreign exchange system, address subsidy-related challenges and simultaneously defeat insecurity. Few leaders would envy such a task.
None of this means the administration should be exempt from criticism. Democratic governance requires accountability, and citizens have every right to demand better results. But criticism should also acknowledge the scale of the problems confronting the country.
History will ultimately judge President Tinubu’s tenure. For now, he remains a leader attempting to steer a troubled nation through difficult reforms while confronting economic and security crises that have accumulated over many years.
Whether one supports him or not, it is difficult to deny that the challenges before him are among the most daunting faced by any Nigerian president in recent history.
Chuks Oyema-Aziken wrote in from Abuja
