Special to USAfrica magazine (Houston) and USAfricaonline.com, the first African-owned, US-based newspaper published on the Internet.
Agbedo is a Professor of Linguistics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, and contributing analyst to USAfrica
In contemporary Nigeria, the intersection of hunger and the distribution of “palliatives” has become a deadly dance, resulting in tragic incidents like the recent fatalities during the Customs sale of rice in Lagos and the stampede at Nasarawa State University. These events lay bare the fatal consequences of mismanagement, neglect, and the politicization of relief efforts in the face of dire socio-economic realities. The recent fatalities during the Customs sale of rice in Lagos serve as a stark reminder of the dangers posed by the mismanagement of relief efforts. The rush to purchase subsidized rice resulted in chaos and tragedy, highlighting the desperation faced by many Nigerians struggling to make ends meet in a harsh economic climate. Similarly, the stampede at Nasarawa State University, where students lost their lives during a rice palliative distribution, underscores the deadly consequences of neglecting the needs of the most vulnerable. What should have been a gesture of support and assistance turned into a scene of horror, thus bringing to the fore the callousness and incompetence of those in power.
The stampede in the last week of February 2024 that reportedly resulted in the deaths of seven people during the sale of seized bags of rice in Lagos by Nigerian Customs stands as a shameful national tragedy, shedding light on the systemic failures and disregard for human life that plague different levels of governance structure. The incident, which occurred as desperate crowds clamored to purchase repackaged 25-kilogram bags of rice at a subsidized price of N10, 000.00, is a stark reminder of the dire socioeconomic conditions faced by many Nigerians. Rather than offering a lifeline to struggling families, the event descended into chaos and bloodshed, revealing the callousness and incompetence of those tasked with upholding the welfare of the citizenry. On Friday, 22 March 2024, another disgraceful chapter in Nigeria’s ongoing struggle with hunger-induced desperation was opened when stampede ensued during rice palliative distribution exercise at the Convocation Square of Nasarawa State University, Keffi Nasarawa State, resulting in the deaths of two students.
The sad events of February and March in Lagos and Keffi respectively raise a number of pertinent issues bordering on the lethal politics of hunger and rice palliative distribution in Nigeria.
First, the intersection of hunger and the distribution of “palliatives” has become a deadly dance that lay bare the fatal consequences of mismanagement, neglect, and the politicization of relief efforts in the face of dire socio-economic realities. The fatal politics of hunger and “palliatives” reflect a broader failure of governance to address the root causes of poverty and food insecurity in Nigeria. Instead of implementing sustainable policies to uplift the most vulnerable, authorities resort to short-term solutions that often exacerbate existing inequalities and tensions within society. In the wake of crises and disasters, governments often deploy palliative measures to alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable. However, in Nigeria, the distribution of these palliatives has taken a sinister turn, morphing into a weapon that exacerbates poverty and inflicts further harm on those it purports to help. The recent mismanagement and inequitable distribution of palliatives in Nigeria have turned what should be a lifeline for the needy into a lethal instrument of oppression and exploitation. Instead of reaching those in dire need, these palliatives have been hoarded, diverted, or distributed based on political patronage, leaving millions to fend for themselves in the face of adversity. The weaponization of poverty through mismanaged palliatives reflects a callous disregard for the welfare of the Nigerian people and a betrayal of the government’s duty to protect and serve its citizens. By denying access to essential resources and support, those in power perpetuate a cycle of deprivation and suffering that deepens the divide between the haves and the have-nots. Moreover, the lethal consequences of mismanaged palliatives extend beyond immediate deprivation to long-term social and economic instability. When basic needs are left unmet, communities are destabilized, trust in government erodes, and social unrest festers, creating a fertile ground for further conflict and insecurity.
Second, the concept of palliatives, originally designed as a stop-gap temporary measure, has regrettably transformed into a fixture of permanence. This metamorphosis serves as a stark indictment of the incompetence and thoughtlessness that have become hallmarks of modern governance in the country. The evolution of palliatives from a temporary solution to a chronic dependency underscores the failure of policymakers to address the root causes of poverty, inequality, and insecurity. Instead of implementing sustainable interventions that empower communities and foster economic development, authorities have resorted to band-aid solutions that offer little more than temporary relief. The distribution of palliatives has become a recurring response to crises and emergencies, yet the continued reliance on these temporary measures highlights a systemic failure to address underlying issues. Instead of serving as a stopgap solution, palliatives have been normalized, perpetuating a cycle of dependency and neglect that undermines efforts to implement lasting solutions to national problems. At its core, the provision of palliatives represents a short-term response to immediate needs, offering relief to those facing acute hardship. However, the normalization of palliatives as a routine or permanent response to recurring crises obscures the need for more comprehensive and sustainable interventions to address the root causes of poverty, insecurity, and inequality. By treating palliatives as a quick fix rather than a prelude to permanent solutions, policymakers risk entrenching a culture of dependency that undermines individual resilience and community development. Instead of empowering citizens to overcome adversity, the reliance on palliatives fosters a sense of entitlement and perpetuates a cycle of handouts that fails to address the underlying structural issues driving poverty and deprivation. Moreover, the normalization of palliatives reflects a broader failure of governance and policy-making in Nigeria. Instead of proactively addressing the root causes of national problems, policymakers often resort to ad hoc measures that provide temporary relief without addressing systemic issues. This short-sighted approach perpetuates a cycle of crisis-response, where emergencies are managed but underlying vulnerabilities remain unaddressed. The perpetuation of palliatives as a chronic dependency also speaks to the broader failure of governance to meet the needs of the Nigerian people. Instead of fostering inclusive growth and development, authorities have allowed a culture of dependency to take root, perpetuating social inequalities and undermining the dignity of citizens.
Third, the bloody fallout of haphazard palliative distribution model underscores the urgency of rethinking the exercise that is gradually turning into a permanent feature of modern governance in Nigeria. The recent incidents involving the distribution of palliatives in Lagos and Nasarawa states serve as grim reminders of the perilous consequences of haphazard and poorly managed relief efforts. What should have been a lifeline for the most vulnerable has instead turned into scenes of chaos and bloodshed, highlighting the urgent need for more effective and equitable distribution mechanisms. In Lagos, the tragic events surrounding the distribution of palliatives by the Customs Excise and Preventive Service exemplify the deadly consequences of mismanagement and lack of coordination. Amidst desperate scenes of crowds clamoring for assistance, lives were lost and chaos ensued as authorities struggled to maintain order and ensure fair distribution. Similarly, in Nasarawa state, the distribution of palliatives to tertiary institution students descended into violence and bloodshed, further underscoring the dangers of inequitable and poorly executed relief efforts. What should have been a gesture of support and solidarity turned into a tragic reminder of the failure of governance to meet the needs of its citizens. These incidents serve as stark reminders of the human cost of haphazard palliative distribution arrangements. When relief efforts are poorly planned and executed, they not only fail to address the needs of the most vulnerable but also exacerbate tensions and inequalities within society, leading to tragic consequences for those caught in the crossfire. Moreover, the incidents in Lagos and Nasarawa highlight the broader failure of governance to effectively respond to the needs of the population during times of crisis. Instead of proactively addressing the root causes of poverty and deprivation, authorities often resort to ad hoc measures that do little to address systemic issues and only serve to perpetuate social inequalities.
Fourth, the distribution of palliatives has become synonymous with a haphazard and thoughtless approach to addressing the myriad challenges facing the country. Instead of addressing the root causes of poverty, inequality, and insecurity, policymakers often resort to “throwing money” at problems, offering temporary relief without meaningful solutions. This shortsighted approach not only fails to address the underlying issues but also perpetuates a cycle of dependency and neglect that undermines long-term development efforts. The thoughtlessness of relying solely on palliatives as a crisis response strategy is evident in its failure to address the systemic issues driving social and economic vulnerabilities. Rather than investing in sustainable solutions that promote economic empowerment, social inclusion, and community resilience, policymakers opt for quick fixes that offer little more than temporary respite. Moreover, the indiscriminate distribution of palliatives often exacerbates existing inequalities and tensions within society. Without proper targeting and accountability mechanisms in place, resources meant for the most vulnerable can end up in the hands of the well-connected or the politically influential, leaving those in greatest need without assistance.
( Continues tomorrow )
The Fatal Politics of Hunger and Palliatives in Contemporary Nigeria (II)
Additionally, the reliance on palliatives as a crisis response strategy reflects a lack of foresight and planning on the part of policymakers. Instead of proactively addressing the root causes of crises and building resilience to future shocks, resources are allocated reactively, with little consideration for long-term sustainability or impact. In the case of Nasarawa for instance, the decision to distribute such meager quantities of rice (5-kilogram bags) to tertiary students speaks volumes about the disconnect between policymakers and the realities faced by ordinary Nigerians. Instead of addressing the root causes of poverty and insecurity, authorities resorted to tokenistic gestures that did little to alleviate the suffering of those in need. The bloody fallout of the palliative distribution in Nassarawa State underscores the systemic failures that plague Nigeria’s governance structures. From inadequate planning and coordination to the lack of transparency and accountability, the incident lays bare the dysfunction and incompetence that characterize the country’s response to crises. Moreover, the violence that erupted during the distribution of palliatives reflects the deep-seated frustrations and grievances of Nigerians who feel abandoned and marginalized by their government.
Again, the hunger-induced tragedy in a country as blessed with abundant human and material resources as Nigeria underscores the stark reality that many Nigerians continue to face dire hardships, exacerbated by a failure of governance and compassion. Nigeria’s land of plenty should be a beacon of hope and prosperity for all its citizens. Yet, the stark contrast between abundance and deprivation is a damning indictment of the inequities and injustices that persist within the country’s socio-political landscape. While some enjoy the fruits of wealth and privilege, many others are left to languish in poverty and hunger, with their most basic needs unmet. The desperation that led to the stampede in Nasarawa is symptomatic of a larger crisis of governance and accountability. Instead of implementing sustainable solutions to address poverty and food insecurity, authorities have resorted to tokenistic gestures and short-term palliatives that do little to address the root causes of suffering and deprivation.
Also, the tragedy that unfolded at the convocation square of Nasarawa State University, where 5-kilo bags of rice almost interminably awaited the arrival of Governor Sule to inaugurate a rice palliative distribution, epitomizes the profound emptiness at the heart of governance in Nigeria. The avoidable tragedy exposes the troubling trend of political leaders prioritizing optics over impact, ceremony over substance. The stark contrast between the ceremonial pomp and the devastating loss of life underscores the disconnect between political spectacle and the harsh realities faced by ordinary citizens. It is indeed a poignant image to contemplate: a governor preparing to inaugurate a rice palliative distribution, an event that should symbolize compassion and support for the most vulnerable members of society. Yet, instead of relief and assistance, what transpired was a scene of chaos and tragedy, as hunger-induced desperation claimed the lives of innocent students. The emptiness of the convocation square charade serves as a metaphor for the hollowness of governance in Nigeria, where symbolic gestures often take precedence over substantive action. Inaugurating a palliative distribution may seem like a noble gesture, but it rings hollow when it fails to address the underlying issues driving poverty and insecurity. Indeed, the sheer hollowness of executive inauguration of the palliative distribution, an event that turned what should have been a solemn duty into a state-sanctioned spectacle of inanity speaks volumes. In a country grappling with deep-seated poverty and inequality, the idea of a governor inaugurating a rice palliative distribution, while intended to convey a sense of official support and solidarity, instead underscores the absurdity of governance in Nigeria. Surely, the symbolism of such an event rings hollow when it fails to address the underlying issues plaguing society. Indeed, the tragic stampede at Nasarawa State University exposes the emptiness of symbolic gestures in governance—the tendency for political leaders to prioritize optics over substance, ceremony over action.
The students’ impatience, fueled by prolonged waiting for the arrival of the state governor to officially inaugurate the rice palliative distribution, culminated in a desperate rush to obtain the promised relief. In frenetic moves that threw all caution to the wind, the desperate students scampered and clambered over themselves as they scaled through the walls and fences to rush the paltry 5-kilo bags of rice. Pandemonium ensued in the chaotic process, leading to injuries and fatalities in a heartbreaking stampede. This avoidable fatal incident lays bare the perilous consequences of bureaucratic delays and the undue emphasis placed on ceremonial events over timely and effective action. In a country where deep-seated socio-economic challenges diminish the citizens at every turn, the spectacle of celebrating such a thoughtless poverty alleviation measure with such unbridled pomp and pageantry of media glitz and razzmatazz, serves as a stark reminder of the poverty of the mind and the incompetence that plague governance in Nigeria. It speaks to the gravity of the governance crisis facing the Nigerian state at different levels of government. The choreographed hype and ostentatious display surrounding the inauguration of the rice palliative distribution policy belies the fundamental flaws inherent in its conception and implementation. Rather than addressing the root causes of poverty and food insecurity, the policy reflects a superficial approach to governance—a mere tinkering at the edges of systemic issues without offering substantive solutions. Indeed, the decision to prioritize rice as the primary form of palliative reveals a profound lack of understanding of the complex realities facing Nigerians. While rice may provide temporary relief from hunger, it does little to address the underlying structural inequalities that perpetuate poverty and deprivation in the country. Moreover, the lavish ceremony surrounding the inauguration of the rice palliative distribution policy stands in stark contrast to the lived experiences of ordinary Nigerians, many of whom continue to struggle to make ends meet in the face of rising inflation, unemployment, and insecurity. Instead of addressing these pressing issues, authorities opt for grand gestures that offer little more than symbolic comfort. The poverty of governance reflected in Nasarawa’s rice palliative distribution fiasco extends beyond mere incompetence; it embodies a profound disconnect between the ruling elite and the plight of the masses. By prioritizing photo ops and spectacle over substance, policymakers demonstrate a callous disregard for the everyday struggles of ordinary Nigerians, further eroding public trust in the government’s ability to address their needs.
Also, the seeming national fixation on rice as the quintessential face of palliative measures in Nigeria speaks volumes about the crass thoughtlessness that often characterizes poverty alleviation policies in the country. While rice holds significance as a staple food, its exclusive portrayal as the solution to poverty overlooks the complex and multifaceted nature of deprivation experienced by millions of Nigerians. The reliance on rice as the primary palliative reflects a lack of strategic foresight and empathy on the part of policymakers. Rather than adopting a holistic approach that addresses the root causes of poverty, relief efforts often resort to simplistic solutions that fail to consider the diverse needs and circumstances of beneficiaries. This narrow focus on rice overlooks the nutritional deficiencies and dietary diversity required for overall well-being. While rice may provide sustenance, it cannot adequately address the nutritional needs of individuals, particularly vulnerable populations such as children, pregnant women, and the elderly, who require a balanced diet rich in vitamins, minerals, and proteins. Furthermore, the exclusive emphasis on rice fails to acknowledge the economic realities and cultural preferences of different regions and communities across Nigeria. By prioritizing rice as the universal palliative, policymakers neglect the potential of locally sourced foods and agricultural produce to stimulate economic growth, enhance food security, and promote dietary diversity. The crass thoughtlessness of poverty alleviation policies is further exemplified by the indiscriminate distribution of rice as a palliative measure, including to varsity students. This one-size-fits-all approach overlooks the unique needs and vulnerabilities of student populations, who may require support in areas such as access to educational resources, mental health services, and financial assistance.
Perhaps, the same exclusive monopoly, which rice enjoys among other staple food items in Nigeria as the sole driver of poverty alleviation strategy permanently cast on the stone of palliatives could have informed Aliko Dangote’s official rice palliative inauguration. While hailed as a philanthropic effort, the inauguration of a 15 billion naira worth of rice palliative by Dangote for all 774 Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Nigeria raises concerns about the sustainability and long-term significance of tokenistic gestures in addressing the pervasive challenges facing communities across the country. On the surface, Dangote’s initiative appears commendable—a multi-billion naira venture aimed at providing relief to millions of Nigerians grappling with food insecurity and economic hardship. However, a closer examination reveals the limitations and complexities inherent in such largesse. Firstly, the sheer scale of the palliative, spanning all 774 LGAs, raises questions about its equitable distribution and long-term impact. While intended to reach the most vulnerable populations, there is a risk that resources may be unevenly distributed or fail to reach those in greatest need, particularly in remote or underserved areas. Moreover, the inauguration of the rice palliative raises broader questions about the role of private philanthropy in addressing systemic issues such as poverty, hunger, and inequality. While Dangote’s gesture may provide immediate relief, it does little to address the root causes of these challenges or promote sustainable development. Furthermore, the reliance on external philanthropy to fill gaps in social welfare underscores the failure of government institutions to fulfill their mandate of providing essential services and support to citizens. While private sector initiatives can complement government efforts, they should not serve as a substitute for robust public policies and programmes aimed at addressing systemic issues. Additionally, the tokenistic nature of Dangote’s palliative raises concerns about its long-term sustainability and impact. While rice may provide temporary relief, it does little to address the underlying structural inequalities that perpetuate poverty and food insecurity in Nigeria. Without accompanying efforts to promote economic empowerment, improve access to education and healthcare, and address systemic barriers to development, the impact of such initiatives may be short-lived.
Furthermore, there is compelling urgency to shift the paradigm beyond hand-outs and rethink rice palliative as hunger alleviation strategy. The recurring reliance on handouts as a strategy for alleviating hunger in Nigeria mirrors the tokenism of giving a hungry person a fish to eat, rather than teaching them how to fish for sustenance. While immediate relief may temporarily ease hunger pangs, it fails to address the systemic issues perpetuating food insecurity and poverty. It’s time to move beyond tokenistic gestures towards sustainable solutions that empower individuals and communities to break free from the cycle of hunger and dependency. Handouts, whether in the form of rice palliatives or other temporary measures, provide short-term relief but do little to address the root causes of hunger and poverty. They create a dependency mindset among beneficiaries, fostering a cycle of reliance on external assistance rather than promoting self-sufficiency and resilience. Instead of serially resorting to handouts, policymakers must prioritize long-term solutions that address the structural inequalities driving food insecurity. This includes investing in agriculture and rural development, improving access to education and healthcare, and creating economic opportunities for marginalized communities. Empowering individuals with the knowledge and skills to produce their own food is key to breaking the cycle of hunger and poverty. This involves supporting smallholder farmers with training, resources, and access to markets, as well as promoting sustainable farming practices that increase resilience to climate change and other external shocks. Furthermore, addressing the underlying factors contributing to food insecurity, such as inadequate infrastructure, land tenure issues, and market inefficiencies, is essential for creating an enabling environment for food production and distribution. Beyond agriculture, addressing poverty requires a multifaceted approach that tackles its root causes, including unemployment, lack of access to education, gender inequality, and social exclusion. Investing in social safety nets, such as cash transfer programmes and job creation initiatives, can provide a more sustainable pathway out of poverty for vulnerable populations.
Finally, it is imperative to recognize and address the complex interplay between national security challenges and the pervasive food insecurity plaguing the country. In recent years, Nigeria has grappled with a myriad of national security challenges, including terrorism, banditry, and kidnapping for ransom. These scourges not only threaten the safety and stability of the Nigerian state but also serve as key drivers of food insecurity and the attendant grinding poverty, hunger, and starvation experienced by millions of Nigerians. The nexus between national security challenges and food insecurity in Nigeria is multifaceted and deeply entrenched. The activities of terrorist groups, such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), have ravaged communities in the Northeast, displacing millions of people from their homes and disrupting agricultural activities. This displacement has not only led to a loss of livelihoods but has also created food shortages and heightened vulnerability to hunger and malnutrition among affected populations. Similarly, the rise of banditry and kidnapping for ransom in various parts of the country has further exacerbated food insecurity. The activities of criminal gangs have instilled fear and insecurity in rural communities, leading to the abandonment of farmlands and disruption of food supply chains. This has resulted in food shortages, price hikes, and decreased access to nutritious food for millions of Nigerians, particularly in conflict-affected areas. Moreover, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, fueled by illicit arms trafficking and porous borders, has facilitated the activities of armed groups and criminal syndicates, exacerbating insecurity and undermining efforts to address food insecurity and poverty. The resulting instability and violence have created a vicious cycle of poverty and hunger, trapping vulnerable populations in a state of perpetual deprivation. Addressing the nexus between national security challenges and food insecurity requires a comprehensive and holistic approach that addresses the root causes of both phenomena. This includes strengthening security institutions to combat terrorism, banditry, and kidnapping, while also addressing the underlying grievances that fuel violence and conflict. Additionally, efforts to promote food security and poverty alleviation must be prioritized, with investments in agriculture, rural development, and social protection programmes aimed at empowering vulnerable communities and building resilience to shocks. This includes improving access to land, credit, and agricultural inputs for smallholder farmers, as well as expanding social safety nets to support those most affected by insecurity and poverty. Also, enhancing cross-border cooperation and regional collaboration is essential to address the transnational nature of security threats and ensure a coordinated response to insecurity and food insecurity in the region. By working together with neighbouring countries and international partners, Nigeria can better address the root causes of insecurity and poverty and pave the way for a more stable, prosperous, and food-secure future for all its citizens.
In conclusion, there are many angles to the fatal politics of hunger and “palliatives” in contemporary Nigeria. Given that the consequential fatalities and sundry issues constitute a damning indictment of governance failures and systemic inequalities, it is imperative that authorities take decisive action to address the root causes of poverty and food insecurity and ensure that relief efforts are conducted with compassion, integrity, and accountability. Only then can Nigeria hope to break free from the cycle of tragedy and build a more just and equitable society for all its citizens. The weaponization of poverty through mismanaged palliatives is a grave injustice that must be confronted and rectified. Nigeria’s government has a duty to uphold the rights and dignity of its citizens, particularly in times of crisis. Only through transparent, equitable, and accountable governance can the cycle of poverty and suffering be broken, paving the way for a more just and prosperous future for all Nigerians. The normalization of palliatives as a routine response to national problems reflects a failure of governance and policy-making in Nigeria. Instead of perpetuating a cycle of dependency and neglect, policymakers must prioritize long-term solutions that address the root causes of poverty, insecurity, and inequality. Only by investing in sustainable development and empowering citizens can Nigeria hope to break free from the cycle of crisis-response and build a more resilient and inclusive society for all. The tragic incidents in Lagos and Nasarawa serve as sobering reminders of the deadly consequences of haphazard palliative distribution arrangements. It is imperative that Nigeria learns from these tragedies and takes decisive action to improve the effectiveness and equity of relief efforts, ensuring that all citizens have access to the support and assistance they need during times of crisis.
The thoughtlessness of relying solely on palliatives as a crisis response strategy highlights the need for a fundamental rethink of Nigeria’s approach to addressing social and economic challenges. Instead of offering temporary relief, policymakers must invest in sustainable solutions that promote long-term development and resilience. Only then can Nigeria hope to break free from the cycle of dependency and neglect that has long plagued its development efforts. The increasing permanence of palliatives as a fixture of Nigerian governance underscores the failure of policymakers to address the root causes of poverty and inequality. To move forward, Nigeria must prioritize sustainable interventions that empower communities and foster inclusive growth, while also strengthening accountability mechanisms to ensure that resources are used effectively and transparently.
The tragedy at the Convocation Square of Nasarawa State University speaks to the emptiness at the heart of governance in Nigeria. It is a sobering call to action for political leaders to prioritize substance over symbolism and to work tirelessly to address the pressing needs of the people they represent. Only through genuine empathy, compassion, and meaningful action can Nigeria hope to overcome the profound emptiness that plagues its governance structures.
The hollowness of inaugurating a rice palliative distribution by a governor underscores the deeper issues of governance and leadership in Nigeria. It is a symptom of a system that prioritizes optics over substance, ceremony over action. Until political leaders prioritize meaningful change over empty symbolism, tragedies like the one at Nasarawa State University will continue to occur, and the plight of the most vulnerable will remain unaddressed. The national fixation on rice as the face of palliative measures highlights the urgent need for a more thoughtful and comprehensive approach to poverty alleviation in Nigeria. By embracing diversity, empathy, and innovation, policymakers can ensure that relief efforts are effective, inclusive, and responsive to the needs of all Nigerians, ultimately leading to a more equitable and prosperous society for all. The official pomp and pageantry surrounding Nasarawa’s rice palliative distribution policy serve as a sobering reminder of the poverty of governance that plagues Nigeria. Until policymakers prioritize substance over spectacle and demonstrate a genuine commitment to addressing the root causes of poverty and inequality, the country’s governance crisis is likely to persist, leaving millions of Nigerians trapped in a cycle of deprivation and despair.
Although Dangote’s inauguration of a 15 billion naira worth of rice palliative may be celebrated as a philanthropic gesture, it underscores the limitations of tokenistic approaches to addressing systemic challenges. To truly make a meaningful impact, efforts must be directed towards addressing the root causes of poverty and inequality, promoting sustainable development, and ensuring that all Nigerians have access to the resources and opportunities they need to thrive. The serial recourse to handouts as a hunger alleviation strategy in Nigeria is a short-sighted approach that fails to address the underlying causes of food insecurity and poverty. It’s time for policymakers to shift towards sustainable solutions that empower individuals and communities to build resilient livelihoods and break free from the cycle of hunger and dependency. By investing in agriculture, education, healthcare, and economic opportunities, Nigeria can ensure a future where no one goes hungry and everyone has the opportunity to eke out a living without having to rely on daily handouts in the name of palliatives. The nexus between national security challenges and food insecurity poses a formidable threat to Nigeria’s stability and development. Addressing this complex interplay requires a concerted effort to strengthen security institutions, promote inclusive development, and foster regional cooperation. Only through a comprehensive and holistic approach can Nigeria effectively address the root causes of insecurity and poverty and ensure a brighter future for all its citizens.
