The editorial’s tone feels unduly harsh on President Tinubu, and it oversimplifies the complex interplay between economic reform and political restructuring. While the call for restructuring is valid and necessary, dismissing President Tinubu’s focus on the economy as misguided overlooks the realities of governance in a nation like Nigeria. The economy is the bedrock of society; as Karl Marx famously said, it is the superstructure that influences all other aspects of life, including politics. Is that notion no longer relevant today?
In truth, the relationship between the economy and political structures is not one of simple cause and effect. Each influences the other in profound ways. To suggest that restructuring should come first, or that President Tinubu’s economic efforts are a waste of time, fails to appreciate the complexities involved. Economic reforms, especially in a country facing severe financial challenges, are crucial. They lay the groundwork for any meaningful political change. Without a stable economy, restructuring efforts could be undermined by social unrest and instability.
Moreover, the editorial gives short shrift to the time it takes for economic policies to bear fruit. President Tinubu has made bold moves, such as removing subsidies and floating the naira, which are not without their challenges, but they reflect an understanding of the immediate need to stabilize Nigeria’s economy. It’s too early to dismiss these efforts as failures.
It’s also important to recognize the political realities that any leader faces. Implementing restructuring requires building consensus across a deeply divided society. The editorial assumes that President Tinubu has abandoned his commitment to restructuring, but it’s more likely that he is navigating the complex political landscape with a strategic, phased approach.
Furthermore, it’s worth noting that Punch Newspapers has often appeared more like an opposition party than a neutral observer, consistently finding fault in President Tinubu’s administration. This persistent negativity has damaged their credibility. A credible newspaper should hold leaders accountable, but it should also be fair and balanced, recognizing achievements where they exist instead of always searching for faults.
Criticizing President Tinubu for not prioritizing restructuring over economic reform is shortsighted. Both are essential, and both require time, effort, and careful planning. The editorial’s strong stance does a disservice to the nuanced and challenging task of governing a nation like Nigeria. The real question is not which comes first, but how both can be pursued effectively in tandem. President Tinubu deserves a more balanced assessment, one that recognizes the difficulties of his position and the importance of addressing both economic and political issues together.
