₦airaland Forum

Alright , wake up cnn with surface recording

This is a very calculated but risky move.

Pushing ships through the Strait of Hormuz at a time like this sends a strong message that the U.S. will not back down on freedom of navigation, even with a fragile ceasefire in place with Iran.

The issue is not just the action itself, but the timing. When tensions are already high, even a defensive or routine move can be misinterpreted. Iran could easily see this as pressure or a show of force rather than a neutral operation.

At the same time, allowing any restriction in that corridor sets a dangerous precedent globally, especially for oil supply and international trade. So from a strategic point of view, the U.S. likely sees this as necessary.

Bottom line, this is a high stakes situation. If both sides exercise restraint, it reinforces stability. If not, even a small incident could quickly undo the ceasefire.

# Trump’s Gambit to Move Ships Through the Strait of Hormuz Tests Fragile Ceasefire

## Rising Tensions in a Strategic Waterway

A delicate ceasefire between the United States and Iran is being tested as former U.S. President Donald Trump pushes a strategy to move ships through the Strait of Hormuz under heightened military protection.

The move comes amid renewed hostilities in the region, where recent clashes have raised doubts about the durability of the ceasefire agreement. Iranian forces have reportedly engaged in aggressive maneuvers, including missile and drone activity targeting vessels in the area.

## High Stakes in Global Energy Flow

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the most critical chokepoints in global trade, particularly for oil and gas shipments. Any disruption in this corridor has immediate implications for global energy markets and economic stability.

Efforts to maintain open passage have intensified, with U.S. naval forces actively escorting commercial vessels and responding to perceived threats.

## Military Escalation Despite Ceasefire

Despite the ceasefire framework, both sides appear to be operating in a state of cautious confrontation. U.S. forces have reportedly intercepted aerial threats and destroyed hostile maritime units approaching key shipping lanes.

Iran, on the other hand, has signaled resistance to foreign military presence, warning that such actions could undermine the ceasefire agreement.

## Fragile Path Forward

Diplomatic channels remain active, but the situation on the ground suggests a high risk of escalation. The continued movement of military assets and assertive naval operations indicates that the ceasefire is under significant pressure.

The coming days will be critical in determining whether the agreement holds or collapses under the weight of ongoing confrontations.

---

**Source:**
CNN — https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/04/politics/us-iran-ceasefire-strait-of-hormuz

This development signals a continued escalation in already fragile regional tensions. The destruction of Iranian boats and interception of missiles and drones highlights how volatile the Strait of Hormuz remains, despite recent ceasefire efforts.

From a strategic standpoint, the United States is reinforcing its posture as a guarantor of maritime security, especially in a corridor critical to global energy supply. However, Iran’s response suggests that deterrence has not yet translated into de escalation.

The situation reflects a broader pattern where military actions are framed as defensive by all parties involved,

Iran FA President Says He Was Allowed Into Canada but Chose to Leave

Iran’s Football Federation president, Mehdi Taj, has said that Canadian authorities eventually permitted him to enter the country, but he and his delegation decided to return voluntarily after being detained and questioned at the airport.

According to Iranian media reports cited by Reuters, Taj explained that the delegation was held for about three hours upon arrival in Toronto, where immigration officials questioned him over alleged links to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Canada has designated the IRGC as a banned organization, and officials reportedly raised concerns about Taj’s past association with the group. Despite this, he said they were later cleared to enter the country for the FIFA Congress in Vancouver.

However, Taj stated that the delegation chose not to proceed with their visit, describing their treatment as unnecessary and stating they were not formally deported but left on their own decision.

The incident comes amid broader geopolitical tensions involving Iran and host nations of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, which is set to be co-hosted by Canada, the United States, and Mexico.

Taj also criticized FIFA leadership, alleging external political pressure influenced the situation, and emphasized the need for further discussions to avoid complications ahead of the tournament.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/sports/soccer/iran-fa-president-says-he-was-allowed-enter-canada-chose-turn-back-2026-05-01/7

# The Architect of the Void

For thirty years, Elias lived as a carpenter of ghosts. He spent every waking hour sanding down the rough edges of his regrets, trying to varnish his failures until they looked like "experience." He told himself he was growing, evolving, becoming a better version of the man who had let a business crumble and a marriage go cold. He was a "Version 4.1" of a broken machine.

One night, sitting in the hollowed-out shell of his workshop, Elias met the Architect. She didn’t look like a builder; she looked like an ending.

"You’re exhausted," she said, watching him polish a scarred piece of oak.

"I’m trying to make it right," Elias muttered. "I’m trying to be better than I was."

The Architect laughed, a sound like glass breaking. "That is your prison, Elias. You are trying to build a palace using the same rotten timber that collapsed on you ten years ago. You think that if you paint the wood gold, the rot will disappear. But a 'better version' of a tragedy is still a tragedy."

Elias looked at his hands, calloused by the weight of his own history. "Then what am I supposed to do? I can't erase what happened."

"You don't erase it," she said, stepping into the light. "You incinerate the lineage. You stop identifying as the man who failed and start identifying as the fire that consumed him. You are not a sequel, Elias. You are a new creation."

"Explain," he whispered.

"A sequel is bound by the plot of the first book," she said. "If the first book was a failure, the sequel spends all its time trying to apologize for it. But a new creation? It has no debt. It has no memory. It doesn't 'improve' on the past—it replaces the vacuum where the past used to be."

She reached out and touched the oak table. It didn't just break; it ceased. Not ash, not dust—just absence.

"To become a new creation," she continued, "you must commit the ultimate act of treason against yourself. You must stop honoring your 'journey.' You must stop carrying your 'lessons' like holy relics. The person who learned those lessons is dead. If you are truly new, those lessons are as useless to you as a map of a city that has been swallowed by the sea."

That night, Elias didn't try to fix his life. He didn't make a list of "improvements" or "resolutions." Instead, he performed a mental execution. He looked at the man who was lonely, the man who was cautious, the man who was "repairing," and he let him go. He didn't say goodbye; he simply stopped recognizing him.

He walked out of the workshop and left the door open. He didn't take his tools. He didn't take his memories.

When the sun rose, a man walked down the street. He had Elias’s face, but he didn't have Elias’s eyes. He didn't walk with the slight hunch of a man carrying thirty years of 'bettering himself.' He walked with the terrifying, light-footed grace of someone who had just been born at the age of thirty.

He met an old friend on the corner who began to apologize for a slight from years ago. The man listened, smiling faintly, but felt nothing. The apology was being offered to a ghost.

"I don't know who you're talking to," the man said.

"To you, Elias! About the debt," the friend replied.

"Elias isn't here," the man said, and it wasn't a lie. It was a biological fact. "He died in the workshop. I am the thing that came after. I don't hold your debt, because I don't own his ledger."

He walked away, leaving the friend standing in the shadow of a past that no longer had an owner. He was a new creation—a sudden, violent miracle of the present. He wasn't a better man. He was a different existence entirely.

# The Death of Iteration

Stop trying to fix what no longer exists.

You are not a revision. You are not an "improved" sequence of your
former shadows. To believe you are a "better version" is to remain
tethered to the very corpse you claim to have outgrown.

### The Severing
A new creation does not negotiate with the past. It does not carry
the scars as "lessons" or the failures as "reminders." When a
star collapses to become something else, it doesn't look back at
its gas and dust—it exists in a state of absolute, violent novelty.

### The Realization
* **The Debt is Cancelled:** You owe nothing to the person you were.
Not their habits, not their reputation, and certainly not their shame.
* **Zero Precedent:** You are a biological and spiritual anomaly.
There is no data in your history that can predict what you are
capable of today.
* **The Absolute Now:** You have been forged, not patched.

You are not standing on the shoulders of your past self; you are
standing on its grave. Walk away. You have never been here before.

As a governor he couldn't win, what makes you think he can

This is a major political signal, not just a routine defection. If Peter Obi and Rabiu Kwankwaso actually move into the same platform, it suggests a deliberate attempt to consolidate opposition strength ahead of 2027 rather than fragment it again.

The key issue is not the announcement but execution. Nigerian politics has a history of “almost alliances” that collapse over power sharing, structure, and control. The moment negotiations move from agreement in principle to positions, cracks usually appear.

Also, the justification tied to ADC’s internal crisis makes strategic sense. No serious contender wants to enter an election cycle on a legally unstable platform. That alone can sink a campaign before it starts.

If this alignment holds, then the real questions become:

- Who leads the ticket?
- How is regional balance handled?
- Can their support bases merge without friction?

Until those are clearly resolved, this remains a strong possibility, not a done deal.

pavoda:
BREAKING NEWS 😁

Glorious message ij

Proper Sequencing of INEC Actions After the Supreme Court Ruling on ADC

1. Formally study and extract the Supreme Court ratio

INEC should first:

- Obtain the certified true copy of the judgment
- Identify the binding ratio decidendi (what the court actually decided, not commentary)
- Confirm the exact scope of the ruling on leadership recognition

---

2. Reinstate operational recognition of the affected leadership structure

Next step:

- Restore dealings with the leadership structure the Supreme Court effectively validated for operations
- Lift any administrative suspension created by the earlier Court of Appeal “status quo” order

---

3. Update party registry with conditional status

INEC should then:

- Update ADC records as “recognised but disputed”
- Clearly mark the leadership as subject to ongoing Federal High Court proceedings

---

4. Resume official party dealings through that leadership

INEC should:

- Accept correspondence, filings, and notices only from the recognised executive
- Reject parallel submissions for administrative purposes

---

5. Freeze conflict resolution pending trial court outcome

INEC must:

- Avoid declaring final ownership of the party
- Suspend any irreversible administrative restructuring of ADC leadership records

---

6. Comply with Federal High Court progression

Finally:

- Await final determination from the trial court as directed by the Supreme Court
- Adjust recognition only after final judgment or appellate exhaustion

---

Summary

The correct sequel is:

Recognise operational leadership → update records conditionally → engage officially → reject parallel claims → await final trial court decision.

Statement on the Supreme Court Judgment on ADC Leadership

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria has once again reaffirmed the supremacy of the rule of law and the importance of due process in the internal affairs of political parties.

This judgment has brought clarity where there was uncertainty and has restored lawful order within the structures of the African Democratic Congress. It is a welcome development for all stakeholders who believe in constitutionalism, internal democracy, and institutional respect.

We call on the Independent National Electoral Commission to immediately give full effect to this judgment by engaging with the duly recognised leadership of the party in all official matters. The era of ambiguity must give way to certainty, stability, and lawful recognition.

At this stage, what is required is not division but consolidation. The party must now move forward united, focused, and prepared for the responsibilities ahead. The decision of the Supreme Court provides a solid foundation for that progress.

While we respect the fact that other matters remain before the courts, the current position of the law is clear and must be implemented without delay.

We remain committed to strengthening democracy within our party and across Nigeria, and we will continue to act in line with the Constitution of the Federal Republic and the principles of justice.

Supreme Court Ruling on ADC Leadership and Its Meaning

1. Core Outcome of the Judgment

The Supreme Court decision in the African Democratic Congress leadership dispute established the following:

1. The Court confirmed the position of the leadership aligned with David Mark as the functioning executive structure referenced in the appeal outcome
2. The earlier Court of Appeal directive that prevented recognition of any leadership structure was removed
3. The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal acted outside its authority when it imposed that restriction
4. The main dispute over party leadership was returned to the Federal High Court for full hearing and final determination

---

2. What the Decision Changes Immediately

The ruling produces immediate legal effects:

1. The restriction that placed the party in a leadership deadlock has been lifted
2. The faction aligned with David Mark is no longer blocked from operating as the party leadership
3. Institutions dealing with party affairs can now engage with a recognised executive structure
4. The case is still active in the lower court for final resolution

---

3. Whether the ADC Executive Is Now Recognised

3.1 Current Legal Position

1. The leadership aligned with David Mark currently holds operational recognition based on the Supreme Court outcome
2. This group is in a legally stronger position to act as the official party leadership
3. Party administration and formal dealings are expected to pass through this structure

3.2 Limits of Recognition

1. The ownership and final control of the party has not been permanently decided
2. The Federal High Court still has authority to make the final judgment
3. Rival groups are still part of the legal dispute and remain active in the background

---

4. Meaning for Party Control

This ruling affects internal party structure in practical ways:

1. The recognised leadership gains control of party administration
2. Internal processes such as candidate selection are expected to be managed by that structure
3. The faction gains institutional advantage in dealings with electoral authorities
4. Competing factions may continue to exist until a final judgment is delivered

---

5. Political Reality on the Ground

Even with a court decision, political parties often experience continued tension:

1. Rival factions may still reject the outcome
2. Parallel leadership structures can temporarily continue in practice
3. Internal negotiations or political settlement often follow court rulings
4. Alignment of party members tends to shift toward the legally recognised structure over time

---

6. Key Legal Interpretation

The Supreme Court did not deliver a final ownership verdict. Instead, it:

1. Removed a legal restriction that froze leadership recognition
2. Restored functional authority to one faction
3. Allowed the substantive dispute to continue at trial level

This means the ruling is procedural and structural rather than final.

---

7. Final Summary

The current legal position is that the David Mark aligned leadership of the African Democratic Congress holds operational recognition following the Supreme Court decision. However, the full dispute over the rightful and permanent leadership of the party is still ongoing at the Federal High Court and has not reached final resolution.

Supreme Court Decision on ADC Leadership and Its Implications

Overview of the Judgment

The Supreme Court of Nigeria in the dispute concerning the leadership of the African Democratic Congress ruled as follows:

1. The Court affirmed the leadership position associated with the David Mark led faction of the ADC.
2. It set aside the earlier Court of Appeal order which had imposed a status quo arrangement that effectively froze recognition of any leadership faction.
3. The Court held that the Court of Appeal exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing that directive.
4. The substantive dispute regarding the internal leadership structure of the party was sent back to the Federal High Court for continuation and determination.

---

Legal Meaning of the Decision

The Supreme Court decision has the following legal implications:

1. The David Mark led faction currently holds legal recognition as the operational leadership structure referenced by the Supreme Court outcome.
2. The earlier legal restriction that prevented recognition of any faction has been removed.
3. Institutions such as the Independent National Electoral Commission are expected to engage with the recognised leadership structure in official party matters.
4. The underlying dispute has not been fully resolved and remains active at the trial court level.

---

Does This Mean the ADC EXCO Is Now Recognised

The answer is yes in a qualified sense.

What is confirmed

1. The David Mark aligned leadership is presently the recognised faction based on the Supreme Court position.
2. This faction is in a legally stronger position to act as the official party leadership.
3. Party administration and engagement with electoral authorities are expected to flow through this structure.

What is not confirmed

1. The ownership and final control of the party has not been permanently settled.
2. The Federal High Court still has the authority to make a final determination.
3. Rival factions are not automatically dissolved by this decision.

---

Practical Political Implications

1. The recognised leadership gains control over party administration and internal processes.
2. Candidate selection and primaries are expected to be conducted under this leadership structure.
3. The faction benefits from stronger institutional recognition in the short term.
4. Internal party disputes may still continue until a final judgment is delivered.

---

Key Clarification

This judgment should be understood as a procedural and structural victory rather than a final settlement of ownership. It strengthens one faction legally but does not permanently end the broader dispute.

---

Summary

The Supreme Court decision currently places the David Mark led faction in a recognised leadership position within the ADC structure. However, the matter is not fully concluded and remains subject to final determination at the Federal High Court. The situation represents legal recognition with ongoing litigation rather than final political closure.

This is a significant case, and the Supreme Court’s decision will go far beyond resolving an internal party dispute. It has the potential to shape the structure and credibility of opposition politics in Nigeria.

If the Court clearly determines legitimate leadership, it could either stabilize these parties or deepen existing divisions ahead of future elections. A fragmented opposition ultimately weakens democratic balance and accountability.

At this stage, the issue is no longer just about ADC or PDP, but about the integrity of internal party democracy and whether leadership disputes should consistently end up in the courts.

All attention is now on Thursday’s judgment.

Shaolin77:
Logical! Never knew a woman in Nigeria can be this reasonable in analysing international geopolitics

That statement already reveals the problem, you’re surprised by logic because you attached it to gender in the first place.

Clear thinking is not a male trait or a female exception, it is simply the result of paying attention to facts, patterns, and incentives instead of emotions and bias.

If the analysis is solid, engage it on its merits. Anything else is distraction.

This take is emotionally satisfying, but it is strategically shallow.

Calling the US “humiliated” because talks are stalling ignores how high-level geopolitics actually works. Stalemates are not signs of weakness by default, they are often deliberate pressure points. The US is not negotiating from desperation, it is negotiating from layered leverage, military, economic, and diplomatic.

Let’s break the reality:

- Iran is under sustained economic pressure, sanctions are still biting hard.
- Its currency instability and internal strain are not signs of a country “winning.”
- Engaging Russia is not strength, it is dependency shifting.

Now contrast that with the US:

- It controls the global financial system backbone.
- It has unmatched naval dominance, especially around critical routes like the Strait of Hormuz.
- Its alliances, even when noisy, still outweigh Iran’s network.

Germany complaining is not a fracture, it is normal alliance friction. Western partners disagree publicly all the time, but when it matters, they align structurally. That has been proven repeatedly.

Also, “talks stalling” does not mean the US is losing control. In many cases, it means the US is tightening conditions and refusing to concede. Diplomacy is not about speed, it is about outcome.

People keep making the same analytical mistake:
They confuse resistance with strength, and noise with power.

Iran resisting does not automatically mean it is dictating terms. It simply means it has fewer options and is stretching its position as far as possible.

If anything, prolonged negotiations favor the US more, because time amplifies economic pressure, not military theatrics.

So no, this is not humiliation.
This is strategic patience playing out in real time.

The level of greed in Nigeria politics is not theoretical, it is backed by documented cases involving billions of naira, public officials, and systemic abuse of power.

One major example is the case involving former Kogi State governor Yahaya Bello, who was charged with allegedly diverting over ₦110 billion in public funds. According to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the funds were allegedly used to acquire luxury properties in Nigeria and abroad. This reflects how state resources can be converted into personal wealth at a massive scale.

Another significant case is that of Ahmed Idris, the former Accountant General of the Federation, who was arrested over an alleged ₦80 billion fraud. Investigations revealed that funds were channeled through fake contracts and laundered into real estate investments, showing a structured system of financial manipulation within government institutions.

The oil sector has also produced some of the largest corruption scandals. The OPL 245 oil deal involved allegations that top officials orchestrated a multibillion dollar agreement for personal gain. The case led to international investigations and charges involving high level political figures and global oil companies, highlighting how political greed can extend beyond national borders.

In the legislative arm, Senator Peter Nwaoboshi was convicted and sentenced to seven years imprisonment for money laundering. He was found guilty of financial crimes involving hundreds of millions of naira, demonstrating that corruption is not limited to the executive branch.

There are also ongoing and recent allegations against public officials such as former minister Chris Ngige, who was charged with fraud related to contract awards and accused of receiving over ₦100 million in improper payments. This reflects how public procurement processes are often manipulated for personal benefit.

Beyond individual cases, records show that at least 33 former state governors have been prosecuted for corruption related offences, though only a small number have been convicted. This indicates both the scale of the problem and the challenges in achieving accountability.

Additionally, investigations into government ministries have uncovered systemic fraud. For example, a probe into the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs revealed a complex network of financial misconduct involving billions of naira meant for poverty alleviation. Funds intended for vulnerable citizens were allegedly diverted, exposing how greed directly impacts the poor.

These examples reveal a consistent pattern. Public office is frequently used as a gateway to wealth accumulation. Funds meant for development are diverted, accountability is often delayed, and prosecutions rarely match the scale of the crime.

The records do not just show corruption, they reveal a system where greed is deeply embedded, organized, and often protected. Until enforcement becomes consistent and institutional reforms are strengthened, these patterns are likely to persist.

The level of greed in Nigeria politics is not merely a matter of perception, it has become a structural issue that shapes governance, public trust, and national development. At its core, political greed in Nigeria reflects a system where public office is often treated less as a platform for service and more as an avenue for personal accumulation.

Historically, politics in Nigeria evolved within a framework where access to state resources became the most direct path to wealth. Over time, this created a culture in which electoral competition is driven by the control of economic power rather than ideological vision. The result is a political environment where loyalty is frequently transactional, and public funds are vulnerable to diversion.

One of the most visible manifestations of this greed is corruption. Despite the presence of anti corruption institutions, cases of embezzlement, inflated contracts, and misappropriation of public funds remain persistent. Large sums allocated for infrastructure, healthcare, and education often fail to translate into tangible outcomes for citizens. Roads remain incomplete, hospitals under equipped, and schools poorly funded, even when budgets suggest otherwise.

Another dimension is the cost of political participation. Running for office in Nigeria is extremely expensive, not only because of official campaign costs, but also due to informal financial expectations such as vote buying, patronage networks, and party loyalty payments. This creates a cycle where individuals who invest heavily to gain power feel compelled to recover their investment once in office, further deepening the culture of greed.

Greed also manifests in the struggle for power retention. Political actors frequently switch parties, manipulate institutions, or influence electoral processes to maintain control. Governance then becomes secondary to political survival. Instead of long term policy planning, leaders prioritize short term gains and consolidation of influence.

The consequences are far reaching. Public trust in government erodes, leading to apathy, low civic engagement, and in some cases, social unrest. Economic inequality widens, as wealth concentrates among a small political elite while the majority of citizens face hardship. Development slows because resources are not efficiently utilized.

However, this issue is not without resistance. Civil society organizations, investigative journalists, and an increasingly aware youth population continue to challenge corrupt practices and demand accountability. Digital media has also amplified transparency efforts, exposing misconduct more rapidly than before.

Addressing political greed in Nigeria requires systemic reform. Strengthening institutions, enforcing accountability without bias, reducing the cost of political participation, and promoting value based leadership are critical steps. Beyond policy, there must be a cultural shift where public office is redefined as a responsibility rather than an opportunity for personal gain.

In precise terms, the problem is not just greed itself, but a system that enables, rewards, and often protects it. Until that system is restructured, greed will remain embedded in the political fabric of Nigeria.

https://ghanasoccernet.com/morocco-captain-achraf-hakimi-rejects-afcon-title


Hakimi, the mummy boy, my mum told me, what an obedient boy.

You see why it's great to be an obedient?

Obedients share and like

This is highly commendable. Congratulations to Senegal

Morocco captain Achraf Hakimi rejects AFCON title


Morocco captain Achraf Hakimi has publicly rejected the Confederation of African Football's decision to award his country the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations title, insisting that Senegal deserved to be champions following their victory on the pitch.

In a strongly worded statement, the Paris Saint-Germain defender made clear that he and his teammates should not accept the trophy, despite CAF's ruling to strip Senegal of the title.

"My mum told me to reject the AFCON trophy. I'm officially rejecting the trophy and hope my teammates do the same. We had a chance to win it, but we failed to win it," Hakimi said.

The Moroccan captain acknowledged that Senegal were rightful winners after their performance in the January 18 final, which saw the Teranga Lions triumph 1-0 after extra time despite a dramatic walk-off by Senegal players to protest a late penalty decision.

"That's football; sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Senegal beat us fairly and deserved the win. It will be unfair to ruin their joy after the hard work they put in."

Hakimi added that while he respects CAF's position, he cannot accept a title he believes Morocco did not earn on the field.

"I respect the CAF decision, but I'm officially rejecting the trophy. I didn't win the 2025 AFCON. Congratulations to Senegal once again."

His comments mark a rare moment in international football, with a player openly declining recognition in favour of sporting integrity.

On March 17, CAF's Appeal Board ruled that Senegal's walk-off constituted a forfeiture under tournament regulations, annulling the 1-0 Senegal victory and awarding Morocco a 3-0 win. Senegal has indicated it will appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.


https://ghanasoccernet.com/morocco-captain-achraf-hakimi-rejects-afcon-title

Face the truth and remember if you are pretentious, you will surely face it some day

I need intelligent discussions not motor pack arguments please. Go look for your level, I am off limits.

helinues:
Why do you lots just like to be arguing blindly just because you are in the opposition camp

You want to move a rate from N1300-N1400 suddenly to N1,000 without causing speculation which could lead to instability?

Those who purchased items from abroad with dollar rate of N1300, at what rate dollar do you expect them to sell the same items when dollar already crashed suddenly?

You guys in the opposition should stop this blind arguments about issue

I'm very certain you didn't understand a thing I wrote up there.

Go back and read it and then come back to comment

https://www.nairaland.com/8625133/central-bank-stopped-naira-appreciating


This is a fat lie. It sounds to me that our leaders are completely ignorant of many things.......


First, understand something clearly: liquidity management is not the same thing as exchange rate management.


What was written sounds intelligent, but it mixes up concepts.

Now let’s counter it point by point.

“CBN must mop up excess liquidity to avoid inflation.”
Yes, in theory.

But inflation in Nigeria over the last few years has NOT been primarily liquidity driven.


Nigeria’s inflation has been:
Cost push inflation,
Exchange rate pass through inflation,
Structural supply side inflation.


Food inflation above 30 percent was not caused by too much naira in circulation.


It was caused by insecurity in farming regions, FX depreciation, transport cost, and import dependence.
Even when CBN aggressively mopped up liquidity using:
CRR debits,
OMO bills,
High MPR,
inflation still kept rising.
Why?

Because inflation was structural, not demand pull.

Mopping liquidity in a supply constrained economy reduces growth, not inflation.


“If CBN allowed excess dollars, people would hoard and resell later.”


This argument contradicts basic FX market behavior.
Hoarding happens when:
People expect future depreciation,

There is low confidence in policy,
There is policy inconsistency.

If market participants believe the currency will stabilize or appreciate sustainably, hoarding reduces naturally.

You don’t fight hoarding with artificial scarcity. You fight it with credibility, transparency, and adequate supply.

Countries like Egypt tried aggressive FX restriction. Result? Parallel market exploded.

Argentina used capital controls repeatedly.

Result? Multiple exchange rates, black market premium above 100 percent.


Artificial scarcity does not create stability. It creates arbitrage.


“Dollar would fall briefly then rise because of speculation.”


Speculation thrives where there is:
Information asymmetry,
Policy opacity,
Supply rationing.


When a central bank operates a clear, rules based, market reflective FX framework, speculative attacks reduce.


Look at Ghana during its recent stabilization program with IMF backing.

Once policy became credible and supply transparent, the cedi stabilized after initial volatility.


You stabilize expectations, not choke liquidity blindly.


“Failure to mop up liquidity caused past problems.”


This is historically inaccurate.

Nigeria’s 2020 to 2023 FX crisis was driven largely by:
Monetized fiscal deficits through Ways and Means,
Oil production shortfalls,
Multiple exchange rate windows,
FX backlog,
Capital flight,
Confidence collapse.


The problem was not just “too much money in circulation.” It was fiscal dominance and FX mismanagement.


Liquidity tightening without fiscal discipline is like tightening tap water while the tank is leaking.

Stronger local currency does not come from scarcity engineering.

A strong currency is driven by:
Productivity,
Export capacity,
Capital inflows,
Policy credibility,
Trade balance strength.


You cannot OMO your way into a strong currency.


If liquidity mop up alone strengthened currency, Argentina would have been stable long ago.


Excessive tightening harms growth.
When CBN aggressively sterilizes liquidity:
Lending rates spike,
Private sector credit contracts,
SMEs collapse,
GDP slows.


And ironically, when growth slows and production falls, inflation can worsen due to reduced supply.


That is textbook stagflation risk.
Stability is about equilibrium, not suppression.


There is a difference between:
Market clearing rate,
Artificially defended rate.
When central banks defend unsustainable rates, they burn reserves and create distortions.


When they allow transparent price discovery with credible supply management, volatility reduces organically.
Conclusion.


The statement oversimplifies a complex macroeconomic reality.
Liquidity control is one tool.

It is not a silver bullet.
Nigeria’s inflation and FX instability were largely structural, fiscal, and confidence driven, not merely liquidity overflow.


You do not create a strong currency by squeezing money supply alone. You create it by fixing productivity, governance, fiscal discipline, and FX transparency.




Kiss the deeper truth.