Writing On War, Prussian military theorist and general, Carl Von Clausewitz posited that war is a continuation of politics by other means. Events of history have since proven that assertion to be valid and true especially when the historical outcomes of wars have dictated political and economic influence and statuses of nations and leaders. Drawing practical lessons from great generals like Fredrick the Great of Prussia and Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France and King of Italy, Clausewitz bequeathed one of the finest seminar treatises on war to the world. In it, he predicted the 20th Century “total war” which manifested as World War I and II in manners almost as described by him.
Since the curtains were drawn on World War I and II, the specters of war, violent social struggle, political and economic contentions as well as revolutions have hunted mankind. Recently, the Russia-Ukraine war, the Israeli-Hamas/Palestinian war as well as the trade war between the US, Canada, China and the EU have all conspired to threaten global peace and order. With a new dimension of crisis breaking out between the US, Iran and Israel, many now reasonably fear that a third world war may be in the offing or perhaps, its first shot might have been fired. It is against this backdrop that this article intends to make a brief review of these wars, their implications for global political economy in general and Nigeria in particular.
World War I and II did not only validate the global-scale possibility of wars but also dictated subsequent global political and economic orders in no small measure. For instance, the objective conditions for the success of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 in Russia were provided by World War I. As economic crises broke out in Russia especially with the shortage of grains and general food supply, Russian soldiers also got demoralized due to huge casualties suffered, thus paving way for the birth of a Socialist republic as Marx and Engels had predicted. The world became a bi-polar economic stage. Just as the British industrial revolution was spurred by war and wetted by its gun industry, the United States took an unprecedented benefit of World War I as its raw materials and finished goods were exported to the allied powers. Metal, machines and automobile exportation tripled and food exports rose by 250 per cent for the US.
In a similar pattern, the United States became a superpower on the heels of the 2nd World War. For example, her gross national product (GNP) as measured in constant dollars, grew from $88.6 billion in 1939 when the war began (US was in depression at the time) to $135 billion in 1944, a year before the war ended. War related production soared from a paltry 2% of GNP to 40% in 1943. By the close of World War II, the United States had repositioned and become very dominant as to account for roughly 50 percent of global hard currency reserves. The US experienced an unprecedented industrial boom. It seems the world is traveling that road again!
Apart from the Cuba missile Crisis of 1962, there seems to be no other period that the threat of World War III is more imminent than now. The Russia-Ukraine war which began with Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the US-Iran war which resurfaced in February, 2026 with the US launching coordinated strikes tagged Operation Epic Fury, against Iran, are unprecedented in their effects and implications since World War II. In a somewhat retaliatory move, Iran awkwardly attacked many other countries in the Middle East especially the GCC states like Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar and others. It targeted economic activities in the UAE; the DXB airport and Amazon Web Services data centre in Dubai. It also targeted energy facilities; LNG plant in Qatar, Sitra refinery in Bahrain and oil refineries in Saudi Arabia. It also struck oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. These have altered economic situations of nations. With contemporaneous crises like the geopolitical tensions between the US and China, Sudanese war, Ethiopian conflict, the insurgency and banditry in Nigeria and the trade war between the US, Canada, China and the EU, the world is no longer at ease.
Clearly, advanced economies like the UK and US have mastered the art of converting the gains of war into strength while big European economies like Russia, Germany or France have learnt to easily rise from their ashes like phoenix. It is therefore not an accident that one is more concerned about many African nations especially Nigeria. It becomes more troubling as modern war now has far-reaching implications for both the actual actors in the theatre and the non-actors because of global interconnectivity. Whilst non-actors may not suffer infrastructural destruction or manpower loss, they definitely suffer economic disruptions in no small measure. For example, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has brought untold hardship to so many nations not involved in the war between Iran, United States and Israel. Pump price of petrol have gone all time high to about N1400 per litre in Nigeria while other countries also experienced hike because about 20% of total global supply of petroleum passes through that Strait. By reason of geography and market dynamics, Nigeria’s oil does not pass through Hormuz yet events there dictate market behaviour of Nigeria’s oil.
Sadly, Nigeria has no demonstrable competitive advantage in any sector as to be able to sway any war effort or insulate its citizen or economy from the harsh effects of wars. Despite being the world’s 15th largest oil producer with production fluctuating between 1.5 and 1.7 million bpd and oil as the mainstay of the economy, Nigeria seems not to be strategically positioned to deploy its market strength to protect its people or negotiate any serious terms with other nations in case of an outbreak of war. This is not the case with many European nations. It is interesting to note that before Iran declared Hormuz closed or made it impassable through military action, the maritime insurers and P&I clubs made that happen by withdrawing their covers for war risks. Ships would not sail without insurance cover and a large number of these insurance services are controlled from Europe. So, without firing a shot, Europe could control a major issue that can swing the war effort here or there. European countries have high investments in shipping, marine insurance and other maritime businesses that their market strength could be deployed to dictate war dynamics.
Deliberately building a nation’s economic strength to give heft to its political stature including its military strength and its perception in diplomatic circles is at the core of sovereign resilience. Frederick Engels seemed to have inked that perspective when he wrote in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific that “the economic structure of society always forms the real basis, from which in the last analysis, the whole superstructure of legal and political institutions as well as of the religious, philosophical and other ideas of a given historical period is to be explained”.
Nigeria is not taken seriously because it has no economic strength and thus no political weight. For instance, shortly after Donald Trump designated Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern, he threatened to enter Nigeria to fight the ISIS-linked terrorists which have badly intrigued Nigeria in the last decade. Before Nigeria’s government got its acts together, Americans began military operations in Nigeria and the government had to push a narrative that it was a collaborative effort notwithstanding that the Tinubu-led government was not pleased with such audacious threat to Nigeria’s sovereignty. Nigeria was helpless in the face of internal terrorism and in the hands of a super-power who entered her territory and pursued her war policies. Yes, Nigerians might love the respite that came with such intervention but none would love the disregard for Nigeria’s sovereignty.
To douse the embarrassment and probably manage Trump’s interference, Nigerian government began to make diplomatic moves including rekindling old relationship with the United Kingdom. Clearly, the solution is not to romance King Charles in a Windsor Castle parade or hastily revamp diplomatic ties with the UK as it was clear that Ukraine’s relationship with NATO could not stop Putin’s Russia from invading Ukraine. A nation must earn its respect from others through a well thought out developmental plan; economic power, technological advancement, military strength and top notch leadership. It must have the capacity to give a thing that others cannot easily give or to deny others access to what they could get. It must be relevant in strategic supply chain. That is when its territory will not be whimsically violated.
It is concerning that Nigeria may suffer hugely if these global crises snowball into a full blown World War III. With a population of about 240 million people, weak reserve, poor agricultural plan, poor investment, poor war technology and poor leadership, Nigeria seems to be a re-enactment of Russia of the 1st world war. According to Orlando Figes, Russia had by far the highest population of any belligerent country. Although Russia had a high birth-rate, it was the first allied power to suffer manpower shortages. The population was too young to be mobilized. It had a very weak reserve. The top commanders were drawn from a narrow circle of aristocratic cavalrymen and courtiers with no experience. They conducted the war in the archaic 19th century pattern ignoring technology in 20th century warfare.
So, Nigeria must immediately begin to invest in agriculture and build a food reserve that can last for at least a decade ahead without a need to look abroad for food supplies. Business Day editorial of July 11, 2025 reports that “according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Nigeria records a meager yield of 0.9 tonnes per hectare for beans, compared with Egypt’s 2.1 and Ethiopia’s 4.2. This yield gap is symptomatic of a larger malaise: a reliance on rain-fed agriculture, outdated practices, and unaffordable or unavailable inputs. In the first quarter of 2024, Nigeria imported N1.7 trillion worth of food, contributing to a total ofN2.79 trillion in food imports for the year to date. These figures, released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), reveal a country still highly reliant on external food supplies despite possessing over 36.9 million hectares of cultivable land”. Importation of food will worsen Nigeria’s economic position through foreign exchange distortions and makes the country vulnerable to a number of crises. It is sad that Nigeria imports even fish for food despite its limitless access to the sea. With about 853 Kilometers coastline and a total water surface of about 14.99 million hectares which is about 15.9% of its total area, Nigeria should be self-sufficient in fish and aquatic supplies. Alas, it is not! Nigeria still imports up to 1.2 million metric tons of fish annually.
Steel production ought to have peaked by now but for corruption! Given her vast crude steel endowment, Nigeria should be a top player in the industry. Ajaokuta Steel Mill has an installed capacity of 3 million metric tons per annum and an initial first phase production capacity of 1.3 metric tons of steel per annum. Yet, it seems to be big for nothing. For over forty years, the fund and manpower invested in the project seem wasted together with the 24, 000 hectares of land upon which the industry sits. It is the same malaise afflicting Itakpe Iron Ore Mine. A reserve of 3 billion tons at 32% iron concentration is lying there prostrate. In our full glare, Delta Steel Company (DSC) died and its remnant was taken over by Premium Steel and Mines Limited (PSML). These companies should be providing support for our military, industrial and other metallurgical needs.
Nigeria should be on the same pedestal as China and India in steel production if we had ensured that Ajaokuta is healthy and fully a going concern. Today, war is more technologically driven than it was in 1918 and 1945 but steels are still the crude materials for missiles, guns and other arms and ammunitions. They are still used to construct warships, submarines, rail etc. In short, there is no manufacturing company that does not make use of steel. Therefore, the Nigeria-UK 746 million pounds ($902 million) ports deal for the supply of steel to Nigeria is a self-indictment on Nigeria’s government. Nigeria only helped to boost the failing British steel industry and created thousands of jobs for Britons while further sinking our steel industry. We ought to learn from India who built its steel capacity that Tata Steel of India acquired Corus of Britain in a 6.2 billion pounds deal in 2007.
It is unfortunate that Nigeria’s role in the global energy supply is not just weak but below capacity. But for the 650, 000 bpd Dangote Refinery, our crude oil is unashamedly fully shipped abroad for refinement, only for Nigeria to buy them back as finished products. The three refineries have become moribund due only to corruption and poor leadership. With past earnings from petroleum, Nigeria ought to be able to refine at least, 1.5 million bpd locally but this is sadly not the case. Apart from oil and gas where Nigeria is big in name but small in influence, the nation is practically not doing well in global energy sphere. For its 240 million populations, Nigeria generates only about 4000 megawatts of electricity from the national grid whereas; it needs up to 100, 000 megawatts for industrial and residential needs. Despite this electricity crisis, Nigeria is said to have an installed capacity of 803 MW for solar energy as of 2025. Meanwhile, the country has untapped potential capable of generating up to 210 GW if 1% of suitable land is utilized. So, to position properly, Nigeria must begin to rework its energy policies and develop a roadmap to restoring sanity in this sphere by providing the needed energy to power and grow its industries and light up its homes. It is plausible to predict that a combination of a vibrant steel industry and robust energy sector with sustainable generation and supply will give Nigeria’s economy a great leap especially when the wings of corruption are clipped and mouth of economic vipers are shut.
Nigeria has a large pool of vibrant youths; 70% of the population. As of 17 December, 2025, Action Aid Nigeria reported that nearly 80 million young Nigerians, about 53% of youths, are unemployed. This is despite the very importance of labour as a factor of production and youths as the strength of every labour force. There is no political-economic principle that can grow a nation without its active population gainfully employed in production and distribution of goods and services. Nigeria ought to invest in these youths especially in ICT skills. Sadly both UNICEF and Nigeria Bureau of Statistics agreed that only about 7% of Nigerian youths possess basic ICT skills. Many are online as we write whiling away time on Tiktok, Facebook, instagram and other unprofitable social media engagements including cursing and “cruising”. Yes, Nigerian youths are largely smart and can be deployed into smart intellectual manpower. With investment in youthful energies, the gains that will come with FinTech, robotics, artificial intelligence or drone technology can only be imagined.
Nigeria needs to reduce its religious engagements and elevate its secularism in this era of destructive war campaigns made on the basis of religious sentiments rather than clear-cut economic or political ideologies. Policies should be economic-driven and there must be a deliberate effort to wipe out insurgents and dangerous religious ideologues. Like it or not, America’s interest in the war in Middle East is purely economic. Russian war against Ukraine is not just about Ukraine’s political decision to join NATO or the EU. Rather, it is more of Russia’s desire to control Ukraine’s critical minerals and rare earth elements like lithium, titanium, graphite, beryllium, coal and even oil and gas resources. Toeing the same path but with religious covering, Iran wants to intimidate all nations of the Middle East especially the GCC countries so that it can control economic dynamics in the region and possibly spring up as a world power. In doing this, it built up military arsenal and deployed Islamic sentiments to rally support from home and elsewhere. If Iran war was religious-centric, it would never attack Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam or any Islamic country.
Nigeria must make only well-thought out political and economic decisions for the health of the polity at home and its economic influence abroad. Our meager resources are still being frittered while the purpose of Nigeria’s huge borrowings remains opaque. Just on 31st March, 2026, within four hours of request, Senate approved Tinubu’s borrowing to the tune of 6.9 billion dollars under the nebulous description of meeting government obligations. This takes Nigeria’s public debt to over N152 trillion (about US$94 billion). Public debt under this regime rose by over 65%. The saddest part of the approval is that Senate never debated it as expected of a working assembly. This questions accountability of the famed savings on the removed fuel subsidy.
So, as the world inches further into what seems to be a major war that may either involve the whole world or impact it, Nigeria needs to be quick in putting every facet of the economy together and be in-charge of its politics at home and in the global sphere. Since war remains a continuation of politics by other means, Nigeria must bear in mind Harold Lasswell’s thesis of politics as being about “who gets what, when, how”. Nigeria must deftly work out the “how” if it must have a place in the global political economy that will unfold after now and if it must save the country from either being undermined from within or run down by external powers.
Ayeoba Ige Asemudara, a lawyer, is the founder of Mission Against Injustice in Nigeria (MAIN)
