November 2025
For decades, many Nigerians have blamed the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank for the country’s economic woes. They accuse these institutions of pushing harsh economic reforms—subsidy removals, currency devaluation, and privatization—that deepen poverty and cripple industries. But the real truth is more uncomfortable: the IMF and World Bank may suggest, but it is our leaders who obey.
In reality, no country is ever forced to accept the dictates of these global lenders. Many nations that borrowed money have flatly refused to implement such anti-people policies. Even in Nigeria’s history, there was a time when leaders had the courage to say “no.” During President Shehu Shagari’s administration between 1979 and 1983, the IMF insisted that Nigeria must devalue the naira and remove fuel subsidies before accessing loans. Shagari refused. He argued that devaluation would harm ordinary Nigerians and destabilize the economy.
Shagari’s refusal showed a sense of patriotism rarely seen today. He understood that economic independence means protecting the people from external manipulation, not dancing to the tune of foreign institutions. Unfortunately, his successors abandoned that path. When General Ibrahim Babangida came to power, he embraced the IMF’s Structural Adjustment Program (SAP), devalued the naira, removed subsidies, and liberalized trade. The result was a wave of inflation, factory closures, and job losses that ordinary Nigerians are still suffering from decades later.
This is why blaming the IMF and World Bank alone is a convenient excuse. The real culprits are Nigeria’s political class and bourgeois elite who willingly implement these foreign policies for their own benefit. They sign deals, collect loans, and privatize public assets—all in the name of “economic reform”—while ordinary citizens are left to face the consequences. The ruling elite gain political power, foreign recognition, and personal wealth, while the masses are told to tighten their belts.
In truth, the IMF and World Bank do what is natural to them: protect global capital and Western economic interests. It is the job of local leaders to defend their people—but in countries like Nigeria, those leaders have often become partners in exploitation. As Walter Rodney observed in his classic work How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, foreign domination continues in new forms when local elites act as agents of external powers. That is exactly the reality of Nigeria’s economic misfortune.
One of the most visible examples of this class collaboration is Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, former Central Bank Governor and member of the Kano royal nobility. Sanusi—highly educated, articulate, and respected globally—has often been a strong advocate of neoliberal economic policies, such as the removal of fuel subsidies and the devaluation of the naira. From his technocratic perspective, these reforms are meant to “stabilize” the economy and attract foreign investment. But in reality, they have deepened the suffering of the working class, peasants, and ordinary citizens who bear the brunt of price hikes, unemployment, and economic insecurity.
Sanusi, like many within Nigeria’s ruling class, champions policies that align with the interests of global capitalism and the domestic bourgeoisie. His argument that subsidy removal would “free resources for development” ignores the fact that those resources are rarely used to improve public welfare. Instead, they are siphoned off through corruption, wasteful projects, and elite consumption. The ordinary Nigerian—the worker, the trader, the farmer, the unemployed youth—continues to pay the price of elite economic experiments designed in foreign boardrooms and implemented by local technocrats.
This ideological alliance between local elites and foreign interests explains why Nigeria remains trapped in a cycle of dependency. The IMF and World Bank may propose, but it is the Sanusis, the Babangidas, and the Tinubus of this world who dispose—transforming anti-people policies into national strategy. And because they come from the ruling class—nobility, politicians, or corporate technocrats—their policies carry legitimacy that conceals their devastating social consequences.
Look around the world and the pattern becomes clear. Malaysia, during the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, refused IMF loans and charted its own recovery path. China never allowed the IMF or World Bank to dictate its policies. Even India managed its economic reforms on its own terms. These countries advanced because their leaders believed that development must serve national interest, not external approval.
Nigeria, by contrast, continues to live under the illusion that development can come from outside. Each administration repeats the same pattern: borrow money, obey external advice, and punish citizens through harsh economic “reforms.” Meanwhile, the same political elite buy luxury cars, travel abroad for medical treatment, and send their children to foreign schools.
Let’s be clear: the IMF and World Bank only have as much power as our leaders give them. If Nigerian leaders truly represented the people, they would resist policies that impoverish the masses. They would invest in production, education, and job creation instead of devaluing the currency and removing subsidies in the name of “reform.”
The truth is simple—our underdevelopment is not imported; it is homegrown. It thrives on greed, corruption, and a political class that values personal gain over public good. The IMF may write the script, but it is our own leaders who act it out on stage. Figures like Sanusi Lamido Sanusi symbolize how the ruling class can wear the mask of reform while reinforcing structures of exploitation that keep the majority poor and powerless.
Until Nigeria and other developing countries produce leaders who can say “no” when external advice conflicts with national interest, we will continue to live in the shadow of dependency. The struggle for economic freedom is not a battle against the IMF or the World Bank—it is a battle against our own ruling class.
Tags
News