Nigeria in global power play
In the structure of global power, three factors count-economic power, military power and demographic power. Three decades ago, though they were struggling poor nations with no military capability, China and India were regarded as global leaders because of the sheer sizes of their populations. Now, if we remove population, what qualifies Nigeria as a country […]
In the structure of global power, three factors count-economic power, military power and demographic power. Three decades ago, though they were struggling poor nations with no military capability, China and India were regarded as global leaders because of the sheer sizes of their populations.
Now, if we remove population, what qualifies Nigeria as a country to be reckoned with in global affairs? Certainly, Nigeria is not an economic power because if we were to use GDP per capita of about $3,005 as an indicator of economic prosperity, Nigeria is a poor country, or at best a lower middle income country. And Nigeria is obviously not a military power because while South Africa and Egypt are manufacturers of high caliber armaments and fighter jets, Nigeria isn’t. Hence, when we beat our chests and say that Nigeria is an important country in the world, it is essentially on account of the size of our population. We are counted based on our demographic power.
The respect Nigeria gets internationally is not because it’s an oil exporter. It has to do with the fact that Nigeria is the ninth largest country in the world in terms of population (and will be the 5th by 2050 according to estimates) and, by far, the country with the largest concentration of blacks in the world. Indeed, it is said that one in every five black persons in the world is a Nigerian. Yes, population is what gives Nigeria relevance in the comity of nations.
However, we are now told (by Emir Sanusi II of Kano) that population does not matter, that it is rather a liability because “it is uneducated and jobless.” Really? And yet, that is what makes the Nigeria a globally relevant country today.
It was Thomas Malthus that came up with the idea of a population as a time bomb in the later part of the 18th century. He reasoned that population grows twice faster than food output, hence, if left unchecked, could result in a catastrophe.
However, subsequent advances in development theories found such postulation to be nothing but a ruse. Population has never been a problem to development. The real problem is failure of leadership principally, and the manners in which societal resources are harnessed and distributed. This is what determines whether a society would create poverty or prosperity.
Therefore, rather than harping on birth control, controlling marriages, why can’t we fix our gaze on unlocking our potentials and build this very God-given human resource that is making us the envy of the world? Rather than deride population as if it was an anathema, why not craft a vision of taking millions out of poverty and work towards realizing it?
Only acutely lazy political and economic elite would at this era of globalization fail to seize the moment and note the ravaging poverty in the land as an opportunity to put on thinking caps and be more creative and innovative in tackling poverty by making the population an asset upon which to secure global relevance and leadership.
Again, why don’t we leverage on our population by creating opportunities that would enable us to transit to higher levels of economic prosperity so that in years to come we can build upon it to develop defence power? If China and India could manage two and a half billion people each, why are we complaining about a population that is less than 200 million people in a country with over 70 per cent of its land, water and mineral resources yet untapped?
Aliyu writes from Abuja