Nigeria’s ranking on Fragile States Index

Recently, the Fund for Peace, a Washington D.C.-based non-profit, non-governmental research and educational institution, ranked Nigeria as one of the world’s most unstable countries. In its 12th annual Fragile States Index (FSI) released last week, the NGO ranked Nigeria alongside war-torn Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraqi, Guinea, Pakistan, Burundi and Zimbabwe. The organisation cited the economic downturn caused by the fall in oil price and the activities of Boko Haram as reasons for classifying Nigeria   among countries   where peace deteriorated in 2015.
In addition, Nigeria also ranked among those countries classified as “high alert”, meaning that the situation in the country had worsened compared to the previous year. Incidentally, this category is just one level shy of the “very high alert” which comprises countries like Syria, Somalia, Central Africa Republic, Congo Democratic Republic, Yemen, Chad, Sudan and South Sudan where peace had taken flight.
It should be stated that the 12th edition of the index ranking, comprises data collected between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015, even as it is an annual ranking of 178 nations based on their levels of stability and the pressures they face. In an explanation note, it said: “Beset by a tumultuous electoral campaign in 2015 that saw the administration of Goodluck Jonathan unseated by the return to power of Muhammadu Buhari, Nigeria’s standing in the Fragile States Index has worsened, as the economy is deeply impacted by falling oil prices and the north of the country is terrorised by Boko Haram insurgency.”
There is no doubt that ‘The Fund For Peace’ has said the minds of most Nigerians who have been watching with alarm and consternation, the continuing slide of the country into cyclical violence. No doubt, the Nigerian State is a victim of high-level corruption, bad governance, political instability and legitimacy crisis. Unfortunately, decades of efforts have yielded largely stagnation and recession. Such tragic consequences have been the rising tide of poverty, decaying public utilities and infrastructures, social tensions, political turmoil and inevitable drive into conflict and violence.
Social and political commentators have described Nigeria as an “unfinished state” and as a truculent African tragedy in the midst of abundant human and material resources. There is no denying the fact that the Nigerian government remains distant from serving the interest of its people, while the powerful mandarins who have embezzled vast fortunes for political patronage dominate politics at the federal, state and local levels.
Amidst the overwhelming symptoms of state failure, it is no wonder that economic sabotages occur on daily basis, committed by the citizens such as breaking of oil pipelines to siphon oil, cannibalisation of vital infrastructures to mirror citizens’ sense of exclusion from and lack of ownership of the common patrimony. The rise of ethnic militias, de-legitimisation of the state and the threat to the polity,’ among others, all provide theoretical and empirical proofs that even if Nigeria has not totally collapsed, it has met the necessary requirement of a weak state.
Contrary to the media hype, the Nigerian state is seen as the enemy, not just by Boko Haram, but by several militias and groups, each attacking it with as much ferocity, using whatever means they have at their disposal. It is therefore imperative that the country and government become more proactive and consensual in its approach to national issues. This way they would have brought those alienated into the political mainstream if only to avoid any future catastrophe.