DOMESTIC GROWTH VS. FOREIGN RELATIONS

DOMESTIC GROWTH VS. FOREIGN RELATIONS

The business of nation building is a deliberate and strategic one. On account of the current reality of the world being a global village, the place of international relations cannot be underestimated. This is also coupled with the advantage of leveraging to achieve an end or another by nations. However, it is quintessential for a nation to approach each strategically in the pursuit of national development.

It is substantially the duty of each nation to take responsibility for its growth and the welfare of the citizenry. There can be no substitute for this in whatever form. The avenue to achieve this includes government policies, legislations, regulations and ultimately strategic plan. In fact nations like US, France, South Korea, Brazil, Singapore, China, United Arab Emirate, and Qatar to mention a few that have all made it to national prosperity take domestic responsibilities more seriously and this influence a good chunk of their foreign and diplomatic relations strategies. It will cause more evil than good for any nation to rate foreign relations higher and above its domestic responsibilities. I will like to discuss from the nations mentioned earlier, South Korea and China.

A piece titled: THE RISE OF SOUTH KOREA, A LESSON FOR AFRICA published in NewAfrican magazine, April 2011 edition contains my captivation. With reference to a book titled Bad Samaritans- The Guilty Secret of Rich Nations and Threat to Global Prosperity by Ha-Joon Chang, it states:

…According to Chang: The country’s obsession with economic development was fully reflected in our education. We learned that it is our patriotic duty to report anyone seen smoking foreign cigarettes. The country needed to use every bit of the foreign exchange earned from its exports in order to import machines and other inputs to develop better industries.

Valuable foreign currencies were really the blood and sweat of our industrial soldiers’ fighting the export war in the country’s factories. Those squandering them on frivolous things, like illegal foreign cigarettes were ‘traitor’. Imagine any African country doing that? It would be promptly charged with “draconian laws”. But South Korea went even further than that. “Spending foreign exchange on anything not essential for industrial development was prohibited or strongly discouraged through import barns, high tariffs and excise taxes (which were called luxury consumption taxes),” says Chang. “Luxury items included even relatively simple things like small cars, whisky or cookies…

“Foreign travel was banned unless you had explicit government permission to do business or study abroad. As a result, despite having quite a few relatives living in US, I had never been outside Korea until I travelled to Cambridge at the age of 23 to start as a graduate student there in 1986.”

But wait for this: Like the strict rules of currency transactions in Europe under the Marshall Plan, the South Korean Government took absolute control over the country’s then scarce foreign exchange. Chang recalls that violation of the foreign exchange controls could be punished by the death penalty!

For China, from the same edition of the NewAfrican magazine, a piece titled FROM POVERTY TO WEALTH… HOW THE OTHERS DID IT states thus:

Like the USA in the mid-19^th century, or Japan and South Korea in the mid-20^th century, China used high import tariff to build up its industrial base. Right up to the 1990s, China’s average tariff was over 30%. Chang admits that China has been more welcoming to foreign investment than Japan or South Korea were, but China still imposed foreign ownership ceilings and local content requirements that demanded the foreign firms should buy a certain proportion of their inputs from local suppliers.

Contrary to the liberalisation theory and hands-off-by-the-state sermons preached to Africa, China used heavy state intervention and an enlightened state-owned enterprise (SOE) strategy to grow its economy to a point where it is now an economic superpower vying for global domination with the more established big boys. In the past, all Chinese industrial enterprises were owned by the state, but today, the SOE sector accounts for 40% of industrial output.

This is heavy food for thought for Nigeria. To the extent that South Korea and China understand the place of international relations, they were strategic about it and will not allow it dominate their domestic life but otherwise.

I indeed agree with a number of us that have maintained the position that Nigeria does not need to adopt the approach of other nations to development but a Nigerian solution must be designed for the Nigerian problem. However, some factors are fundamentally constant on nations’ path to development. A cursory look at the China’s approach with that of Nigeria reveals the Nigeria is also adopting Foreign Investment (through direct and portfolio investment) and the Local Content recipe.

On Foreign Investment, Nigeria is making huge effort to attract foreign investors, more so with some incentives to encourage same. There has been growth in economic activities of the nation but the nation is not recording the expected attraction. This may not be unexpected in view of the poor infrastructural facilities, insecurity among others bothering the nation.

The salient question to ask is how far foreign investment will help the nation to achieve the desired economic prosperity. Being objective, any foreigner dealing on the Nigerian soil has the guaranteed right of repatriating the profit realized to his home country to the tune of 100%. So if the foreigner repatriates the profit, the money so made is no more exchanging hands within our system. The solution is then cosmetic. The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry boss stated recently that a real and sustainable growth in the nation’s development will be achieved when we have more Nigerian investors whose moneys will remain and revolve within our system. By this we won’t be at the mercy of foreigners.

With respect to Local Content, Nigeria in 2010 promulgated the Local Content Act. The objective of this is essentially to increase value-added content, thereby contributing to national economic development as well as that of stakeholders, partners, clients, companies, employees and contractors, technology transfer and develop local know-how. This is quite admirable being an appropriate step forward. But there appears to be more emphasis on the Oil and Gas industry, then others passively. Even though this industry accounts for about 87% of our nation’s income, we should always remember that there are other viable sectors which have been ignored upon the discovery of oil in Nigeria.

Further to this, implementation, monitoring and enforcement are major challenges to a number of government policies, programmes and enactments. The Local Content Act is facing its own now. More than this, the workability of this law is frustrated by a number of factors including inadequate access to finance, quality of our personnel or manpower, sabotage and poor infrastructural facilities that should aid the functioning of our local industry. In all, enacting a law such as the Local Content Act without considering and ensuring its effectiveness by other factors amounts to a substantial effort in futility.

In the course of my study on Nigeria, our economic history, growth strategies and plans (which is still in progress), I discovered that we have a number of documents which if lived up to, would have moved the nation farther than where it currently is. As I do not intend to turn this piece into a thesis, I will briefly mention the National Economic Empowerment Development Strategies (NEEDS) which evolved from the nation’s compliance with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Like the era of National Development Plan in Nigeria, the NEEDS should be the major influence in drawing the national Budget, Legislations and Policies.

It is imperative to note that the goal of a nation’s development is first and foremost a deliberate and strategic project. Leaders can go about other nations seeking for collaboration in moving a nation forward, it will most certainly not be to the advantage of the aspiring nation.

In conclusion, our national growth will not depend more on our foreign relations or collaboration but more on our domestic seriousness, deliberate and strategic plans to achieve development. In fact, foreign relations will not guarantee national development in the absence of local seriousness save we are travelling back into imperialism.

Olusola Akinyemi Esq.

President

The Joseph Initiative, Lagos.

LEGACIES OF JUNE 12 AND M.K.O. ABIOLA

LEGACIES OF JUNE 12 AND M.K.O. ABIOLA

Nineteen years after the remarkable victory of Moshood Kasimawo Olawale Abiola in the June 12, 1993 Presidential Election, the victory is still as fresh as ever in the hearts of Nigerians. Though the election was inconclusive as no official results were announced, it was so also clear to the blind that he had won the election. Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) overwhelmingly defeated his rival Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC) even in his home state (the North). The election has since been Nigeria’s freest and fairest Presidential election by national and international observers.

However, the election was annulled by Ibrahim Babangida which inflamed political crisis. The annulment was unacceptable not just to Abiola but the people and the people supported the courageous Abiola all the way to reclaiming his people-earned mandate. This struggle witnessed the fall of mighty heroes including Kudirat Abiola (his wife). Abiola also lost his life in 1998 in this struggle.

There is no gainsaying that the June 12 undeclared victory of Abiola, the political crisis, the loss of lives of the mighty; the supporters; and innocent souls, and the firm advocacy for civil rule in Nigeria all culminated into the current day democracy we are experiencing.

Beyond the foregoing, I have been compelled to ask some questions as to why after nineteen years, the fire of June 12 is still burning in hearts of the people. It gains more momentum by the year. So, I have asked myself two questions viz:

1.      What if it had been another person who contested for the June 12 Presidential election, would it have gathered such momentum till date? and

2.      What made Abiola so loved and desired by Nigerians nineteen years after June 12, 1993 and fourteen years after his demise?

On the first question, what readily came to my mind was that, the victory of June 12 was the victory of the people achieved for Abiola. As noted earlier, Abiola won even in the opponent’s home state. He won at the national capital, Abuja, the military polling stations, and over two-thirds of Nigerian states. The victory was unalloyed expression of the truism that sovereignty lies in the people. It was obviously the people’s desire that prevailed. So, the victory of June 12 was the victory of Nigerians for Abiola. The people were also ready to stand and in deed stood by this victory with Abiola till date. It may not impossible to say that if it had been another candidate, the people would still have prevailed but this will be better explored in answering the second question.

What made Abiola so loved and desired by Nigerians nineteen years after June 12, 1993 and fourteen years after his demise? Without much ado, there are three things identifiable in answering this:

1.      Philanthropy

2.      Vision

3.      Identity with the people.

PHILANTHROPY

Abiola sprang to national and international prominence as a result of his philanthropic gestures. His sacrifices and contributions across every sphere of public life was numerous. There has never been a philanthropist on his scale in the history of this nation. In 1990, he donated N1m to each state university, N50,000 to each Federal University for students welfare, N20,000 to the libraries of each Federal University, N25,000 to each Polytechnic and College of Education. To his credit was the construction of 63 secondary schools, 141 libraries, 121 churches and mosques, and 21 water projects in 24 states in Nigeria. He established Abiola Bookshops to provide affordable, locally produced books in the 1980s when imported books became out of the reach of ordinary Nigerians when Naira was devalued. He awarded over 1,000 scholarships to deserving students in tertiary institutions at home and abroad.

This is actually overwhelming. It is expedient to note that philanthropy on this scale is beyond taint with motive to achieve presidency. He did not need to do so much if he had the intention of buying people’s hearts to vote for him. It was more of an expression of compassion which establishes the fact that he related with the people and understood their difficulties. He did not just stop at the understanding, he made efforts to remedy the situation. The people therefore had no iota of doubt that if he became the President, he would do more with the effective use of office.

One of the indispensable qualities of a good leader at any level is relating with followers to understand their fears, worries, emotions and wants. No one will ever be able to touch the lives of the followers without compassion. Abiola exhibited this and the people loved, longed and desired him to lead the nation. Developing a nation and ensuring a better standard of living of the people through government activities, policies and legislations, regulations among others are tied to compassion of the leaders to the followers. If there is no compassion, things can only get worse for the nation.

VISION

Having an understanding of the economic status of the nation which affected the finances and standard of living of Nigerians,  Abiola casted a vision of ending poverty in Nigeria. He spoke the people’s language and because of his personality an deeds, the people believed in his competence and capability to lead the nation out of poverty.

Clarity of vision is an essential factor to be considered in the race of leadership all levels both in the public and private sector. A leader with no vision or clear vision will only stagnate the followers all through his period in leadership. Abiola has a clearly spelt out vision and communicated it to the people. This naturally made people go all out to vote for him and when the election was annulled, the people stood by him to the end of his life even till date.

IDENTITY WITH THE PEOPLE

Abiola identified with the people as opposed to the selected few people that threaten national growth. Though I was in the secondary school in the election year till his demise in 1998 when I left secondary school, my study of this giant revealed that his strength was substantially in the power of the people. He made it incontrovertible to the people that sovereignty lie in them.

This may not be unconnected to the fact that he had enough resources to run his race for presidency. Funding of political races has diverted the loyalty to the few people with resources who support the candidates at the expense of the populace. However, growth in democracy may be a gradual process but we all have the responsibility to desire advancement and indeed advance. Until the time when candidates are sponsored and supported by the ordinary Nigerians collectively, the stake of the few above the populace may drag on.

To conclude this piece, the legacies of the June 12, 1993 Presidential Election by the candidacy and struggle of M.K.O. Abiola and all the people should not be isolated from the celebration of the day.

It is also the day of victory of the strength and will of the people. The challenge of the legacies to the current leaders is to understand the people and have compassion for the followers without which nothing substantial can be done to make people benefit the dividends of democracy. More so, it is a challenge to leaders at all levels to earn the love and support of the populace as opposed to the current few. Loyalty should be to the people.

Olusola Akinyemi Esq.

President

The Joseph Initiative, Lagos.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND NATIONAL UNITY

THEODORE ROOSEVELT AND NATIONAL UNITY

I am a patriot with indefatigable desire not only for national development but for national unity. I have discussed the subject of our national integration in a piece where I stated that “history has thrust upon our generation an indescribably important destiny- to complete the process of integration which our nation has long developed too slowly, but which is our most powerful chance for development”. This piece shall be made public soon.

In advocating for national unity, I am immeasurably thrilled with the person of Theodore Roosevelt (an American President from 1901-1909) and his position on the subject. An encounter with a survey on him in the book: Presidential Leadership is nothing below inspirational and instructive to the people of our nation Nigeria even at this point in time. I feel compelled to share part of the survey on him bothering on national unity.

“… For all his varied interests, national greatness was the dominant concern of his life.

Roosevelt’s patriotism professed a faith in America’s pioneer ethos, the virtues that had won the West and inspired Americans to believe in ourselves as the New Jerusalem, bound by sacred duty to suffer hardship and risk danger to protect the values of our civilisation and impart them to humanity…

…He abhorred the multiculturalist’s adulation of diversity as more important than national unity. He insisted that every American owed primary allegiance to American political ideals and to the symbols, habits, and consciousness of American citizenship. He believed such patriotism didn’t disparage the distinctions of experience in American history, but encompassed and transcended those experiences in a shared and noble endeavor of building a civilisation for the ages, in which all people may share in the rights and responsibilities of freedom.

He spoke out against “the spirit of provincial patriotism” that aggrandized the sentimental attachments people feel for their towns and states into something greater than their national pride. He warned that “the overexaltation of the little community at the expense of the great nation” had ruined many nations and had prevented the countries of South America from uniting in to one great republic.

Were he alive today he would denounce both liberal and conservative extremes, for the former’s emphasis on wants and the latter’s emphasis on rights, and for their mutual disregard for the duties inherent in American citizenship. “We have duties to others and duties to ourselves”, he avowed, “and we can shirk neither”. The Roosevelt code gave equal respect to self-interest and common purpose, to rights and duties.

“When I left college”, he wrote, “I had no strong governmental convictions beyond the very strong and vital conviction that we were a nation and must act nationally…”

Concluding the survey on him, it was written:

“He understood the central fact of American history: that we are not just an association of disparate interests forced by law and custom to tolerate one another, but a kinship of ideals, worth living and dying for, and that we deserve to have our ideals vigorously represented at home and abroad by our national government. He believed that people who are free to act in their own interests and are served by a government that kindles the pride of every citizen would receive their interests in an enlightened way. We would live as one nation, at the summit of history, “the mightiest republic on which the sun ever shone.”

There is no gainsaying that we share our diversity in ethnicity in common with the United States of America.  The unity if the several parts of the nation have contributed immensely to its being a world power today. The giant of Africa can be revived in us as a nation if we get our unity straight and our priorities with values redefined. We will no doubt go farther with unity.

I’m trying to manage my words for pending further details but national unity is our pre-requisite for safety, development, peaceful co-existence, friendly business environment, enhanced diplomatic relationship…

Furthermore, I consider is expedient for anyone in public leadership to read the book: Presidential Leadership. The book is certainly not only for Presidents but also for those who work with the presidency among other citizens. Details of the business of the office of presidency are shared extensively through the survey of past leaders leaving room for a game of gamble or reinventing an already existent wheel, save for approach.

Olusola Akinyemi Esq.

The President,

The Joseph Initiative.