From Third World to First

My gentle readers would know that the title of today’s piece is borrowed from the famous autobiography by the long-reigning founder-leader of Singapore, late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew (1923-2015). In those eponymous memoirs, Lee sought to explain how his country raised itself, as it were, from its bootstraps as a marshy, mosquito-infested backwater into one of the most prosperous nations of our twenty-first century. As we face the prospects of electing a new leader to preside over the high magistracy of our federal republic, there has been no discussion whatsoever on how we can move our country from third to first world status.

The British political philosopher Isaiah Berlin made a famous remark about the fox and the hedge hog. The fox is full of all sorts of ideas, some of the hare-brained, of course. The hedge hog, on the one hand, is driven by a big idea. Almost all our politicians are foxes. They have all sorts of ideas – most of them puny and quite often, pedestrian. There are hardly any statesmen guided by big ideas.

As far as I am concerned, the biggest question facing us today is the economy. The real national debate has to centre on how we can lift our country from a lowly status to the ranks of advanced, prosperous democracies. From a purely GDP per capita standpoint, we are no longer a third world country. With a per capita income of US$2,050, we fall within the category of the lower middle-income nations as defined by the World Bank classification. A lower middle-income country is technically defined as one with an income of US$1,006 and US$3,995. A fully middle-income country is one that has a per capita income between US$3,956 and US$12,235. A high-income nation, on the other hand, means anything from US$12,236 upwards.

To put things in perspective, the top 3 countries by per capita income in 2018 are: Luxembourg (US$120,061); Switzerland (US$86,835); Iceland (US$84,675). The United States comes sixth with US$62,152 while Singapore is in tenth place, with a figure of US$61,767. We are clearly far from the ranks of prosperous democracies by a long haul.

I believe that the real debate that should focus our minds at present is how to reach the upper echelons of a full middle-income status within the coming decade. The long term plan within the next two decades must centre on how to attain a high-income status among the prosperous democracies.

Over the last half-century, economic science has unravelled the critical success factors that propel accelerated growth. Growth is a necessary but not a sufficient condition, for growth. Growth must be underpinned by political stability, social harmony, and the rule of law, good governance, strong and effective leadership, inclusive development and shared prosperity.

For a rentier oil state such as ours, the kind of balanced growth we seek must be accompanied by structural diversification of the economy. We must commit to weaning the economy from dependence on oil. It requires a new development strategy anchored on a mass agriculture-based industrial revolution. The most important sectors for diversification include manufacturing, steel, solid minerals, tourism, LNG and petrochemicals. Of course, we must also address binding constraints such as power and infrastructures and institutional bottlenecks in government and markets.

Nigeria stands at the crossroads of history. We have an opportunity to reinvent our country as a responsible and forward-looking nation and a leader of the African continent. We can also choose to play the game of losers by relapsing to narrow-minded sectarian tribalism. All is possible in this land of extraordinary talents and energy.

Government needs to reinvent as an “entrepreneurial state” that plays a central role in providing enabling environment to private sector led economic development.  Clearly, much remains to be done in the areas of macroeconomic reforms and sectoral interventions. The battle against corruption and commitment to the rule of law must be taken to a new level, with the strengthening of the respective institutions and a vigorous exercise of leadership to achieve accelerated growth and the creation of no less than a New Nigeria.

All these achievements are attributable to the foundation laid by Lee Kuan Yew through the force his personality, his vision and sheer audacity.

First, we must pursue nation building as a central political objective. Lee Kuan Yew deliberately forged a sense of nationhood out of diverse ethnic communities who often eyed each other with suspicion.

Second, Singapore made the rule of law the cardinal principle of rulership and civil government.

Third, Singapore embraced international trade as a vehicle for engineering prosperity.

Fourth, bold efforts were made to enhance national competitiveness, focusing particularly on SMEs and entrepreneurship, research and innovation and opening up new markets and distribution channels.

Fifth, infrastructures development was rigorously pursued not only as a means of bettering the living conditions of the people but as a way of creating an attractive environment for investments.

Sixth, human capital development was pursued with great rigour. They invested heavily in child education at the elementary and secondary level, with emphasis on higher education, particularly in the technical and engineering fields.

Seventh, Lee took deliberate efforts to create a world-class merit based civil service. Recruitment and promotion are based on competitive examinations and performance. Salaries are at par with those of the private sector so as to attract the best while discouraging corruption.

And finally, in a time of upheavals in Indonesia, the Koreas, Vietnam, Cambodia and Myanmar, Lee made his country an oasis of peace and harmony.

Lee Kuan Yew was an outstanding leader who was not threatened by anyone who exhibited exceptional talent. He thrived on gathering around him people of high ability; paying close attention not only to intellectual ability but also to character and individual psychology in selecting those to lead the departments of government as well as the various parastatals. He was, in that sense, unapologetically an elitist. As a leader, he spoke with clarity and conviction. And he was no one to suffer fools gladly. But his critics also had a point when they accused him of slamming ruinous law suits on those who publicly criticised his government.

The Singapore model has worked rather well for the island city-state.  But it is not without its blemishes. Until recently, Singapore has been a country where citizens spoke in whispers; a benevolent authoritarian democracy where the opposition was often hounded and independent opinion suppressed. But things are changing.

When Deng Xiaoping, China’s revolutionary philosopher-king was embarking on his Four Modernisations in 1979, he sent emissaries to under-study Singapore. Singapore provides a good laboratory on how to do it. To quote Lee himself: “There is no reason why third world leaders cannot succeed….if they can maintain social order, educate their people, maintain peace with their neighbours and gain confidence of investors by upholding the rule of law.”

I am persuaded that Nigeria has not only the potential but the innate capacity to become one of the prosperous democracies of the twenty-first century. What is required is that we diversify the economy; harness our abundant natural resources into value-added goods for domestic and world markets; invest in human capital and skills; re-engineer our nation building anchored on the rule of law, good governance and national competitiveness.  What is needed is not difficult to decipher. How to govern with effectiveness is what matters. It requires a new order of leadership; a commitment to national purpose and destiny. Only the deep can call unto the deep.