Tinubu’s reforms necessary to save Nigeria from economic collapse – Oyebade

A former General Officer Commanding (GOC), 1 Mechanised Division of the Nigerian Army, Kaduna and former Commandant, Nigerian Defence Academy, Major General Adeniyi Oyebade (rtd), has defended the economic reforms of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Oyebade described the removal of fuel subsidy and foreign exchange reforms as bold and necessary decisions to rescue Nigeria from a looming economic collapse.

The former NDA Commandant who acknowledged the economic difficulties confronting Nigerians, insisted that the reforms must be understood within the context of years of economic distortions, alleged mismanagement of public resources and the failure of previous administrations to implement national development plans effectively.

Speaking in an interview, the former military commander argued that although the reforms had imposed significant hardship on citizens, they represented a necessary economic reset capable of laying the foundation for long-term stability, growth and national prosperity.

He maintained that the country would have faced more severe economic consequences, had the government failed to address the structural weaknesses that had undermined the economy for decades.

According to him, the removal of fuel subsidy remains one of the boldest decisions taken by Tinubu, despite the controversies surrounding its implementation and the rising cost of living.

“These reforms are absolutely necessary in order to dismantle the decades of economic distortion, mismanagement of our commonwealth and failure to adhere to national development plans that successive administrations had but fell short in implementing across all tiers of government,” he said.

Oyebade urged Nigerians to consider the country’s economic trajectory before Tinubu assumed office in 2023, arguing that an assessment of the current administration’s policies without examining the circumstances that necessitated them would provide an incomplete picture.

He recalled that the country had, for years, spent substantial resources defending the naira and subsidising petroleum products, while alleged irregularities in the subsidy regime and foreign exchange market benefited a limited group of individuals at the expense of the wider population.

The retired general argued that the reforms were intended to redirect public resources towards infrastructure, development and other investments capable of delivering long-term benefits to Nigerians.

“We are now borrowing for infrastructure, for development, things that in the course of time will impact the populace. Progressive change may be slow, but it is sure.

“There are difficulties, no doubt, but we are in the right direction. Our country was on the verge of collapsing,” he said.

‘Subsidy removal one of Tinubu’s boldest decisions’

Defending the removal of fuel subsidy, Oyebade said the policy had become necessary because of the enormous financial burden it imposed on the country and the alleged criminal networks that exploited the arrangement.

He recalled that the price of the dollar, which stood at about N200 to N250 during the 2015–2016 period, had risen to approximately N700–N800 before Tinubu took office, arguing that the exchange rate pressures reflected deeper structural problems in the economy.

According to him, Nigeria had been borrowing approximately $1.5bn monthly to defend the naira, while subsidising foreign exchange and petroleum products in a manner he described as unsustainable.

He also recalled the difficulties Nigerians experienced in accessing foreign exchange through commercial banks, noting that the system created opportunities for arbitrage and benefited some Bureau de Change operators.

“We knew how difficult it was to source for foreign exchange from the banks, which wasn’t so many years gone by. Subsidy was the biggest money heist in Nigeria,” he said.

Oyebade further alleged that the petroleum subsidy regime was undermined by the diversion of subsidised fuel to neighbouring countries, where it could be sold at substantially higher prices.

He explained that the price difference created incentives for smugglers to move petroleum products across Nigeria’s borders rather than sell them within the country.

According to him, the system allowed some operators to benefit from government subsidies while making additional profits from the illegal sale of petroleum products outside Nigeria.

“The same people that are bringing the fuel to Nigeria are the same people, majorly, who also facilitate the smuggling of it abroad,” he alleged.

He added that the operations involved criminal networks with collaborators at different points within the supply chain, including ports, borders and financial institutions.

The former GOC also cited previous public concerns over fuel subsidy claims and crude oil revenues, referring to questions raised by former Minister of Finance, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, and former Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi.

He argued that the removal of the subsidy had helped address longstanding abuses, although the immediate consequences included higher fuel prices and increased pressure on household incomes.

Oyebade acknowledged that petrol prices had risen considerably since the policy was introduced, but maintained that the government needed to address the underlying causes of the country’s fiscal difficulties.
Crude oil theft, illegal mining threatening economy.

The retired general also identified crude oil theft and illegal mining as major drains on Nigeria’s economic resources, arguing that tackling them was essential to improving government revenue and strengthening national security.

He recalled that crude oil theft and pipeline vandalism had significantly affected the country’s petroleum industry, with illegal refineries and unauthorised vessels allegedly contributing to the diversion of crude oil.

According to him, crude oil theft has declined substantially in the past three years, while daily production has improved.

He described the development as a positive outcome for the country, stressing that the benefits should not be viewed as an achievement for the President alone but as a gain for the Nigerian people.

“Is that not a plus to the Nigerian people? Because this success is not about Mr President. It’s our commonwealth,” he said.

The former GOC also linked insecurity in some parts of the country to illegal mining, explaining that criminal groups allegedly arm local militia and other armed elements to protect their access to mineral deposits and sustain their illegal operations.

He said the activities had deprived the country of substantial revenue from minerals such as gold and lithium, while helping to finance violence and criminality in affected communities.

He welcomed the Federal Government’s efforts to strengthen control over the mining sector, arguing that legal mining operations could generate significant revenue through taxes and royalties.

The former military commander cited the Federal Government’s efforts to attract mining companies as a positive development, saying the country stood to benefit from improved regulation and the formalisation of mineral exploitation.

He, however, warned that criminal groups benefiting from illegal mining were unlikely to surrender their interests without resistance.

“Do you think they will give up without a fight? They are not interested in the welfare of Nigerians. They just want money to continue committing their atrocities,” he said.

He maintained that reforms in the mining sector, alongside those in the military and other parts of the economy, were necessary to address the interconnection between economic sabotage, insecurity and the loss of public revenue.

On the country’s security situation, Oyebade rejected suggestions that insecurity was a new phenomenon, recalling that Nigeria had battled terrorism, banditry and other forms of violence for years before the current administration came into office.

He cited the emergence of Boko Haram in 2009, the activities of the Islamic State West Africa Province and the spread of armed groups across the Sahel as factors that had contributed to Nigeria’s security challenges.

Drawing from his experience as GOC of the 1 Mechanised Division and later Commandant of the Nigerian Defence Academy, Oyebade said he participated in several military operations aimed at containing terrorism and other threats to national security.

He recalled that the bombing of the United Nations office in Abuja and attacks in Nyanya were among the incidents that illustrated the severity of the security situation in previous years.

Oyebade said the concrete barriers and other security installations still visible around major government institutions in Abuja served as reminders of the period when bombings and other attacks heightened fears across the country.

He said the military had recorded successes in several operations, including the neutralisation of terrorists and bandits, but acknowledged that security challenges remained in parts of Nigeria.

According to him, the persistence of insecurity should not obscure the efforts and sacrifices of military personnel and other security agencies.

He noted that many officers and soldiers had lost their lives in the course of protecting the country, urging Nigerians to appreciate the risks security personnel continued to face.

“Sometimes I feel that a large majority of our population do not deeply appreciate the huge sacrifices the military and security agencies make. It’s not just a job to serve. It is the readiness to sacrifice our lives for country.

“What’s greater than that?” he asked.

Oyebade nevertheless stressed that the existence of security threats should not become an excuse for complacency, insisting that the government must continue to strengthen its response.

He cited Tinubu’s approval for the expansion of the Nigerian Army from eight to 12 divisions, increased recruitment, the acquisition of additional military equipment and efforts to reorganise intelligence agencies as measures intended to improve the country’s security architecture.

He also welcomed the President’s support for state police, describing the proposed arrangement as necessary because security challenges often emerge and develop at the local level.

“The establishment of state police is a deep necessity because every security challenge is first and foremost local,” he said.

He explained that bringing security personnel closer to communities would improve intelligence gathering and enable authorities to respond more effectively to emerging threats.

The retired general also cited the establishment of additional military training depots, including facilities in Osogbo and the South-East, as part of efforts to increase the number of troops available for deployment.

He said the President had also approved an increase in police personnel to strengthen the country’s capacity to respond to security threats.

Oyebade further argued that Nigeria’s security challenges must be examined within the wider regional context, particularly the proliferation of arms following conflicts in Libya and other parts of North Africa.

He said the spread of weapons across the Sahel had complicated security operations in Nigeria and neighbouring countries, including Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Cameroon.

While acknowledging the complexity of the problem, he expressed confidence that Nigeria would eventually overcome the challenges.

Oyebade who faulted the sweeping criticism of Tinubu also challenged the perception that Nigerians were uniformly opposed to Tinubu’s administration, arguing that criticism on social media did not necessarily reflect the views of the entire population.

Responding to concerns that many households were struggling to afford food and other necessities, Oyebade acknowledged that the hardship was real but disagreed with the suggestion that all Nigerians shared the same assessment of the administration.

“Some Nigerians not all. he said, correcting the suggestion that Nigerians as a whole were dissatisfied with the government,” he said.

He maintained that citizens had the right to express dissatisfaction with government policies, while others were equally entitled to support the administration’s economic direction.

Oyebade said he might disagree with certain aspects of the government’s policies but argued that the President had access to information and economic data that might not be available to critics.

“I may disagree with some aspects of the policy, but you see, I am not the one on the chair to know the perspective which the President has, because he has more information, more data to enable him take decisions which I’m not privy to,” he said.

He also argued that complaints about economic hardship were not peculiar to Nigeria, citing the rising cost of living in the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany.

However, he cautioned that the existence of similar challenges elsewhere should not be used to excuse Nigeria’s difficulties.

According to him, governance in a country as large and complex as Nigeria requires difficult decisions, public debate and an appreciation of competing interests.

He said the country’s democratic system provided an opportunity for citizens to express their preferences and hold leaders accountable through elections.

Oyebade also urged Nigerians to extend scrutiny beyond the Federal Government to state administrations, particularly in view of the increased allocations accruing to states.

He said some states had performed well, but argued that citizens should demand accountability from their respective governments over the use of public funds.

“What about the states that are getting three to five times what they were getting before? Are their state citizens demanding accountability?” he asked.

Oyebade acknowledged that the government’s economic policies had not eliminated hardship, but pointed to the Nigerian Education Loan Fund as an example of an intervention capable of improving access to education.

He said the scheme had enabled thousands of Nigerian students to remain in school while receiving financial support for their upkeep.

Although he admitted that the reported monthly stipend of N20,000 was insufficient to meet all the needs of beneficiaries, he described the intervention as an important step towards easing the financial burden on students and their families.

“Is it enough? Not exactly, but it is a big step forward,” he said.

He maintained that the success of the reforms should ultimately be assessed by their ability to improve the welfare of citizens, expand economic opportunities and strengthen the country’s long-term development prospects.

While expressing support for the administration’s overall economic direction, Oyebade conceded that the measures taken so far might not be sufficient to address the full scale of the country’s challenges.

“Is the President doing enough? It may not be enough, but we are on course,” he said.

The former military commander argued that the reforms would require time to deliver their anticipated benefits, urging Nigerians to consider both the immediate costs and the potential long-term gains.

His defence of the administration comes amid continuing public concerns over rising food prices, petrol costs, exchange rate pressures and the wider cost-of-living crisis confronting households across the country.

For Oyebade, however, the central argument is that Nigeria’s economic difficulties cannot be separated from the structural problems that preceded the current administration, and that reversing longstanding distortions requires difficult decisions, stronger institutions and sustained implementation.

He expressed optimism that the country could emerge stronger if the reforms were pursued alongside measures to improve security, curb economic sabotage and ensure that the benefits of national resources translated into better living conditions for ordinary Nigerians.