The Tinubu and Kuan Yew parallel: A reality check

By Bimbo R Akinjokun

The comparison is persistent: Nigeria’s President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Singapore’s transformative leader, Lee Kuan Yew. While often intended as a high compliment, this parallel, frequently championed by political loyalists and at times bordering on sycophancy, sparks considerable debate, especially when viewed through the lens of Nigeria’s current realities. The discussion moves beyond mere historical aspiration, directly addressing the substance of today’s governance and its impact on everyday Nigerian lives.

Advocates for the Lee Kuan Yew comparison frequently feature several key policy directions of the current Nigerian government, framing them as bold, transformative steps. A cornerstone of this comparison rests on President Tinubu’s “tough decisions.” The immediate removal of the fuel subsidy on his inauguration day and the unification of foreign exchange rates are often presented as reforms akin to Lee Kuan Yew’s decisive actions that propelled Singapore’s economy. Yet, these policies have brought significant hardship. Nigerians are grappling with soaring inflation (around 33.95% as of May 2024), a weakened naira, and a dramatically increased cost of living. While the government asserts these are necessary sacrifices for long-term stability, the promised palliatives have been slow to materialise, and the tangible benefits remain largely unseen by the average citizen.

Similarly, an emphasis on infrastructure development is a core part of the administration’s plan, reminiscent of Lee Kuan Yew’s foundational work. Major projects like the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway and various road and railway modernisations are underway or planned. However, Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit is immense compared to Singapore’s initial challenges, and projects often face delays, cost overruns, and questions of transparency. The pace and broad impact on daily life are yet to match Singapore’s rapid, comprehensive overhaul. In the crucial area of anti-corruption, Lee Kuan Yew established a zero-tolerance culture. While the Nigerian government states its commitment, with agencies like the ICPC reporting ongoing investigations, public skepticism persists. Unlike Lee Kuan Yew’s immediate and highly effective war on graft, Nigeria’s systemic corruption demands visible, high-impact actions. Public perception of transparency, particularly concerning recovered funds, needs significant improvement to approach Singapore’s established integrity. Finally, the drive for economic diversification and foreign investment is a clear policy objective, echoing Singapore’s strategic economic re-orientation. While there’s a strong push to attract investment in manufacturing, energy, and technology, current macroeconomic instability—especially exchange rate volatility and persistent high inflation—remains a major deterrent for investors. Nigeria’s “ease of doing business” still lags far behind Singapore’s streamlined environment.

When viewed holistically, the very parallel drawn between Nigeria’s current president and Lee Kuan Yew, when placed against the present context, reveals a critical distinction: it endeavors to liken a proven legacy of comprehensive national transformation from a small, less complex nation to Nigeria’s trajectory, which noticeably falls short of the foundational effort that powered Singapore’s ascent amidst its vast diversity and historical volatility. The Tinubu administration is undertaking ambitious reforms, but the scale of Nigeria’s challenges and ongoing governance issues mean that the journey towards anything resembling Singapore’s success is exceptionally long and arduous.

The comparison, therefore, serves as a rhetorical device for political loyalists, often crossing into undue adulation, designed to fashion an exaggerated reality. This narrative clings to the illusory hope that today’s ‘tough decisions,’ as presented by those drawing the parallel, will miraculously yield a Singaporean-style dividend. Yet, for many Nigerians, the waiting has become an excruciating ordeal, underscoring, yet again, the glaring need for unique, context-specific solutions rather than a perpetually imported, ill-fitting comparison.

Akinjokun, a leadership and human development consultant, writes from Ibadan, Oyo State.

READ ALSO: How Tinubu’s foreign policy benefits the common man