Building a Developmental State: What Nigeria Can Learn from China’s Revolutionary Journey

By Raymond Na’anlep Delmut

Dongfang Scholar, Peking University, China
Nigerian Diplomat, Policy Analyst, and Author

Development is often measured by economic statistics, towering skylines, high-speed railways, and technological breakthroughs. Yet beneath every enduring national transformation lies something far more fundamental, strong institutions, visionary leadership, disciplined governance, and a society united around a long-term national purpose. These are the enduring lessons that emerge from China’s revolutionary history and modernization journey, lessons that hold particular relevance for Nigeria as it seeks to strengthen its institutions and accelerate national development.

Much of the global conversation on China’s rise begins with the economic reforms introduced in 1978. While those reforms undoubtedly transformed the country into one of the world’s leading economic powers, they tell only part of the story. China’s remarkable achievements were built upon institutional foundations laid decades earlier during one of the most difficult periods in its history. The experiences of the Chinese Soviet Republic, the Long March, and the revolutionary base at Yan’an created a culture of resilience, organizational discipline, strategic planning, and leadership development that would later underpin one of history’s most remarkable modernization projects.

During the PKU Dongfang Scholars Programme at Peking University, scholars from across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East examined this historical evolution through lectures, policy dialogues, field visits, and engagements with academics and government institutions. One lesson consistently emerged: sustainable development is rarely accidental. It is built patiently through institutions capable of surviving political transitions, adapting to changing realities, and maintaining a consistent national vision.

China’s transformation illustrates that modernization begins long before economic growth becomes visible. The revolutionary administration established in Jiangxi during the early 1930s experimented with governance despite extreme resource constraints. It developed systems of local administration, public health, taxation, education, agricultural management, and judicial administration while confronting military pressure and political uncertainty. When circumstances forced the revolutionary leadership to embark on the Long March, these institutions were not abandoned. Instead, they were preserved, refined, and strengthened.

The Long March itself has become a symbol not simply of endurance but of institutional survival. It demonstrated the importance of preserving leadership, protecting organizational knowledge, and adapting strategy to changing realities. The subsequent establishment of the revolutionary base at Yan’an transformed the movement into a centre of political education, leadership training, policy experimentation, and governance innovation. Many of the principles later associated with China’s modernization including merit-based leadership development, long-term planning, organizational discipline, and continuous policy learning were cultivated during this formative period.

Nigeria’s own historical trajectory has been markedly different. Since independence in 1960, the country has demonstrated enormous resilience despite periods of political instability, civil conflict, constitutional transitions, and changing development priorities. As Africa’s most populous nation and one of its largest economies, Nigeria possesses exceptional human capital, abundant natural resources, entrepreneurial dynamism, and considerable regional influence. Yet these strengths have not consistently translated into sustained institutional effectiveness or broad-based economic transformation.

The comparison between Nigeria and China is not intended to suggest institutional imitation. The two countries differ profoundly in their political systems, historical experiences, constitutional structures, and social realities. Rather, the value of comparison lies in identifying transferable principles that can strengthen governance within Nigeria’s democratic and federal framework.

Perhaps the most significant lesson concerns long-term strategic planning. China’s successive Five-Year Plans have provided continuity across generations of leadership while remaining aligned with broader national development objectives extending several decades into the future. In contrast, Nigeria has produced numerous ambitious development plans, many of which have been weakened by inconsistent implementation, shifting political priorities, and institutional discontinuity. Development becomes more sustainable when national priorities remain consistent regardless of changes in political leadership.

Leadership development represents another important lesson. China has invested systematically in preparing public officials through specialized institutions dedicated to continuous education, strategic planning, and governance. Nigeria already possesses respected institutions such as the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, the Public Service Institute of Nigeria, the Foreign Service Academy, the National Defence College, and the Administrative Staff College of Nigeria. The challenge is not institutional absence but ensuring that leadership development becomes a continuous, merit-based process fully integrated into national governance.

Equally important is the role of institutional discipline. China’s experience demonstrates that effective governance depends upon accountability, performance evaluation, ethical public service, and administrative coordination. Nigeria has established important institutions to promote transparency and combat corruption, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, and the Code of Conduct Bureau. Continued reforms aimed at strengthening coordination, consistency, and public confidence will remain central to building a more effective state.

Infrastructure also emerges as more than an economic asset. China’s investments in transport networks, logistics corridors, industrial parks, and digital infrastructure have served not only economic purposes but also strengthened national integration and state capacity. Nigeria’s continued investment in roads, railways, ports, power, and digital connectivity can similarly contribute to economic growth while reinforcing national cohesion.

Perhaps the most enduring lesson concerns human capital. China’s sustained investment in education, science, technology, engineering, research, and innovation has enabled its transition from labour-intensive manufacturing to a knowledge-driven economy. Nigeria’s greatest strategic resource is not oil, gas, or minerals, but its youthful population. Unlocking that potential will require substantial and sustained investment in education, technical skills, research, entrepreneurship, and digital innovation.

China’s modernization also illustrates the importance of national purpose. Throughout its developmental journey, public institutions have remained broadly aligned around shared national objectives. While democratic societies naturally accommodate political competition and ideological diversity, development itself need not become a partisan issue. Nigeria’s political parties may legitimately differ in policy preferences and governing philosophies, yet education, infrastructure, industrialization, food security, healthcare, technological advancement, and youth development should remain enduring national priorities.

The broader significance of China’s experience extends beyond economics. It demonstrates that modernization is fundamentally a process of building capable institutions, cultivating effective leadership, maintaining policy continuity, and investing in people. These principles are not exclusive to any political ideology. They represent universal foundations of successful state-building.

For Nigeria, the path forward lies not in copying another country’s model but in adapting proven governance principles to its own constitutional, democratic, and cultural realities. The country’s diversity, entrepreneurial energy, diplomatic influence, and youthful population provide immense opportunities for transformation. What remains essential is the sustained commitment to strengthening institutions, promoting accountability, investing in human capital, and maintaining a long-term national development vision.

History reminds us that great nations are rarely built within a single political administration. They are constructed patiently through generations of disciplined leadership, institutional learning, and collective national purpose. China’s revolutionary journey illustrates how resilience, strategic planning, and organizational discipline can eventually produce remarkable modernization. Nigeria possesses the human and material resources to achieve comparable national transformation through its own democratic path.

The future of Nigeria will ultimately depend not on the abundance of its resources but on the strength of its institutions, the quality of its leadership, and the willingness of its citizens to place long-term national development above short-term political interests. The challenge before Nigeria is therefore not simply economic; it is institutional. Building a developmental state begins with building institutions capable of sustaining national progress for generations to come.

Raymond Na’anlep Delmut
is a Nigerian diplomat, policy analyst, Dongfang Scholar Peking University, and author of several books. His research focuses on diplomacy, governance, leadership, modernization, development policy, comparative public administration, and South–South cooperation.

Building a Developmental State: What Nigeria Can Learn from China’s Revolutionary Journey

Africa and France: From Colonial Shadows to a Partnership of Equals

By: Michael Mike

French Emmanuel Macron and Kenyan William Ruto, recently cohosted the Africa Forward Summit in Nairobi, with the intention of rebuilding relations between France and African countries. Present were many African leaders, Michael Olukayode in this report tries to place what the meeting means to France and Africa, now and in the future

For more than six decades after formal decolonisation, relations between France and Africa have remained among the most complex, controversial and strategically important international relationships in the world. What began as a colonial enterprise evolved into political alliances, military partnerships, economic dependence, cultural exchanges and, increasingly in recent years, bitter disputes over sovereignty and influence.

Today, however, that relationship appears to be entering another turning point.

At the Africa Forward Summit in Nairobi, Kenya, co-hosted by Emmanuel Macron and William Ruto, African and European leaders attempted to redefine the future of Africa-France relations around the language of equality, co-investment, sovereignty and shared prosperity.

The summit was historically symbolic. For the first time, the traditional Africa-France summit was held in a major Anglophone African country rather than a Francophone former French colony. That alone reflected a deliberate shift in France’s African policy.

But beneath the optimistic language of partnership lies a deeper historical question: can France truly build a new relationship with Africa without confronting the enduring legacies of “Françafrique”?

The Burden of History

France’s relationship with Africa cannot be understood without examining colonialism and the post-independence system that followed it.

Following the independence movements of the 1950s and 1960s, France retained enormous political, military and economic influence over many of its former colonies in West and Central Africa. Through military agreements, monetary arrangements such as the CFA franc, strategic resource control, and elite political networks, Paris maintained what became known as “Françafrique” — an informal system of influence that critics described as neo-colonial.

For decades, France intervened militarily in African states, supported friendly governments, influenced political transitions and protected economic interests. French companies dominated sectors ranging from oil and mining to telecommunications and infrastructure.

To many Africans, particularly younger generations, the relationship increasingly appeared unequal. France was often seen not as a partner but as a guardian of old structures that preserved dependency.

Anti-French sentiment grew sharply across parts of West Africa in recent years, particularly in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, where military juntas expelled French troops and questioned France’s long-standing role in regional security.

This changing political mood explains why the Nairobi summit represented more than diplomacy; it was an attempt at political reinvention.

Macron’s Attempt to Redefine France-Africa Relations

President Macron openly acknowledged during the summit that France’s traditional approach to Africa had become unsustainable.

“For too long,” he admitted, “too many people… saw Africa as their back yard. That is over.”

That statement was perhaps one of the most candid acknowledgements ever made by a French president regarding France’s historical posture toward Africa.

Macron’s speeches in Nairobi repeatedly emphasized that Africa no longer wants charity, paternalism or lectures from Europe.

“The African continent does not want us to come along with aid,” he declared. “People in Africa want us to come and invest.”

Throughout the summit, Macron framed the future relationship around four key concepts:

• equality;
• co-investment;
• sovereignty;
• and mutual strategic interest.

He argued that Europe’s own future prosperity and strategic autonomy are increasingly tied to Africa’s success.

“Supporting your success is a condition of our success,” he said.

This language marked a sharp departure from older diplomatic frameworks in which Africa was often treated primarily as a recipient of aid, humanitarian assistance or security intervention.

Instead, Macron repeatedly described Africa as:

• “the continent of the present,”
• a hub of innovation,
• and a critical partner in technology, energy, industrialisation and artificial intelligence.

The summit also produced concrete economic announcements, including €23 billion in investment pledges for Africa — €14 billion from French firms and €9 billion from African investors.

Why Africa Is No Longer Waiting for Europe

France’s changing tone is not occurring in a vacuum. Africa itself has changed dramatically.

The continent is now the youngest in the world, increasingly urbanised and technologically connected. African governments are diversifying partnerships with China, Turkey, India, Gulf states and Russia. No single external power dominates Africa today.

China’s rise, especially, transformed Africa’s diplomatic landscape. Chinese investment in infrastructure, mining, manufacturing and telecommunications altered the balance of influence that France and other European powers once enjoyed.

Macron himself acknowledged this shift in Nairobi, noting that China, Turkey and the United States had become stronger competitors in Africa because they were often perceived as more commercially aggressive and competitive.

At the same time, African leaders are becoming more assertive in demanding reforms in global governance, financing and trade systems.

This was strongly reflected in the intervention of Bola Tinubu at the summit.

Tinubu’s Intervention: Africa Wants Fairness, Not Charity

President Tinubu’s contribution in Nairobi reflected a broader African frustration with the global economic system.

He argued that Africa’s industrialisation and development are being constrained by unfair financial structures, punitive borrowing costs and weak investment mechanisms.

Tinubu warned that African countries are treated as permanently “high risk” economies, making access to affordable finance extremely difficult.

According to Reuters, Tinubu noted that Nigeria alone is projected to spend $11.6 billion on debt servicing in 2026 — almost half of government revenue.

His intervention aligned closely with the themes raised by Macron and Ruto:

• reform of the global financial architecture;
• support for industrialisation;
• and stronger African economic integration.

Tinubu stressed that Africa must move beyond exporting raw materials toward value-added manufacturing and regional industrialisation.

That position echoed Macron’s own argument that Africa should no longer merely export raw minerals and commodities while industrial processing happens elsewhere.

Tinubu also highlighted Nigeria’s maritime ambitions and offered the country’s Deep Blue maritime security project as a regional platform for Gulf of Guinea cooperation.

His broader message was significant: Africa is not asking for sympathy; it is demanding fair participation in the global economy.

That marks a major philosophical shift in Africa’s international diplomacy.

The Central Contradiction: Trust

Despite the optimistic rhetoric in Nairobi, the future of France-Africa relations still faces a fundamental challenge: trust.

Many Africans remain skeptical of France’s intentions.

Online discussions during the summit revealed continuing suspicion about whether France’s new strategy is genuinely different from older patterns of influence. Some commentators accused France of merely shifting its focus from hostile Francophone countries toward more receptive Anglophone states such as Kenya.

Others questioned whether investment-led engagement could simply become a new form of economic dependency rather than genuine partnership.

These concerns are not baseless.

True partnership requires more than speeches and investment announcements. It requires structural change.

Africa’s future relationship with France — and indeed with Europe generally — must therefore be built on several principles.

What the Future Relationship Should Look Like

1. From Extraction to Industrialisation

Africa can no longer remain primarily an exporter of raw materials.

The continent possesses critical minerals essential for global energy transition, digital technology and manufacturing. Yet much of the value addition still occurs outside Africa.

Future France-Africa relations should focus on:

• local manufacturing;
• industrial parks;
• technology transfer;
• and African ownership within supply chains.

Macron acknowledged this reality directly when he said Africa should not merely be “where raw materials… are extracted but also where processing occurs.”

That is perhaps the most important economic issue of the next generation.

2. Financial Justice and Investment Reform

African countries continue to face disproportionately high borrowing costs despite their enormous growth potential.

Tinubu’s call for financial reform highlighted the urgency of this issue.

If France truly wants a new partnership with Africa, it must support:

• fairer sovereign risk assessments;
• lower financing barriers;
• stronger development banks;
• and African-led financial institutions.

Macron’s support for strengthening the Nairobi-based ATIDI guarantee mechanism may represent one step in that direction.

3. Respect for Sovereignty

Military interventions and political interference severely damaged France’s image in Africa.

Future relations must be grounded in non-interference, mutual respect and African leadership in security matters.

The Nairobi Declaration strongly emphasized that Africans must remain the principal actors in resolving African conflicts.

That principle is critical.

4. Youth, Technology and Human Capital

Africa’s greatest resource is not oil, gold or lithium — it is its people.

The summit repeatedly focused on youth, innovation, digital technology, AI, sports and creative industries because both African and European leaders recognize that the continent’s demographic strength could become a global economic engine.

France’s future role should therefore prioritize:

• education partnerships;
• research collaboration;
• digital infrastructure;
• entrepreneurship financing;
• and mobility for African students and professionals.

1. A Relationship Beyond Colonial Memory

History cannot be erased, but it does not have to permanently imprison the future.

France must continue confronting difficult aspects of colonial history honestly, while African governments must also engage pragmatically with new opportunities.

The future cannot be built entirely on resentment, nor can it be built on denial.

What Africa increasingly demands is dignity, reciprocity and respect.

A Defining Transition

The Africa Forward Summit may ultimately be remembered as the moment when France publicly accepted that the old order in Africa had ended.

Macron himself acknowledged this transformation:
“That is over.”

But declarations alone will not redefine the relationship.

The real test will lie in whether:

• investments become genuine partnerships;
• financing becomes fairer;
• African industries become stronger;
• and sovereignty becomes respected in practice rather than rhetoric.

Africa today is no longer a passive actor in global affairs. It is increasingly confident, assertive and strategic.

France can either adapt to this new Africa as an equal partner — or continue losing influence to countries that understand the changing realities more quickly.

The future of France-Africa relations will therefore not be determined in Paris alone.

It will increasingly be shaped in Nairobi, Abuja, Kigali, Lagos, Dakar, Johannesburg and across a continent that is no longer waiting to be spoken for.

Africa and France: From Colonial Shadows to a Partnership of Equals

DEMOCRACY AND THE COURAGE TO BELIEVE

By: Barr. Jonathan Abakpa

Democracy remains the hallmark of a people’s aspirations. At its very essence, democracy is about the will of the people, their hopes, their voices, their choices, and their collective vision for society. There may be differences in perspectives, competing ideologies, and divergent opinions on how democracy should function, but beneath these differences lies one enduring truth: democracy is about people.

Today, democracy has become the most widely accepted system of government worldwide because it recognises the dignity and agency of citizens. In Nigeria, this democratic journey has endured for twenty-seven uninterrupted years. This milestone deserves recognition. It reflects resilience, progress, and Nigerians’ determination to continue choosing dialogue over dictatorship, ballots over bullets, and participation over exclusion.

Yet anniversaries are not merely occasions for celebration; they are moments for reflection. They compel us to ask difficult questions about whether democracy is delivering on its promises and whether citizens still believe in the democratic project.

In his Democracy Day address, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu spoke directly to Nigerian youth, urging them to believe in Nigeria and its future. It was a powerful call to optimism. Indeed, no nation can prosper if its young people lose faith in the possibility of change. Young people are not merely beneficiaries of democracy; they are its custodians, innovators, defenders, and future leaders. However, belief cannot be demanded; it must be earned.

Democracy is strongest when citizens trust the process, when they see their voices reflected in governance, and when they feel protected by the institutions created to serve them. Citizens believe in democracy not simply because elections are held, but because they can see evidence that the system works for them.

The President rightly observed that democracy without security is a failed democracy and reassured Nigerians that his administration is working to improve the nation’s security architecture. This recognition is important because security is not separate from democracy; it is one of its foundations. Freedom loses meaning when people live in fear.

Yet, even as these assurances were being made, the nation continues to confront painful realities. Reports of kidnappings, attacks on communities, and the abduction of innocent children remind us that many Nigerians still wake up uncertain of their safety. The image of children stolen from their homes and communities is not merely a security concern; it is a challenge to the very promise of democracy.

How can young people fully believe in the future when the road to school is uncertain?
How can citizens confidently participate in governance when fear dictates their movements?
How can democracy flourish when survival becomes a daily struggle?
There was another moment in the President’s Democracy Day address that deserves reflection. In recognising distinguished Nigerians with national honours, the President rightly celebrated individuals whose contributions have shaped the nation’s democratic journey. Such recognition is important. Nations must remember those who have served and sacrificed for the common good.
Yet democracy grows beyond elections, political offices, and moments of official recognition.

The girl who walks miles to school through uncertainty and insecurity because she refuses to let her future be stolen.
Democracy is also sustained by countless Nigerians whose names may never appear on an honours list, but whose courage keeps the nation alive every day.
They are the heroes of our democracy.
The young woman who refuses to surrender her dreams to discrimination, exclusion, or violence.

The student who studies by candlelight, convinced that education remains a bridge to a better tomorrow.
The young entrepreneur who wakes every morning uncertain of the next fuel price increase, transportation cost, electricity tariff, or economic shock, yet still chooses to create, innovate, and persevere.
The farmer who plants despite fear.
The teacher who inspires despite limitations.
The health worker who serves despite inadequate resources.

The men and women of our armed forces and security agencies who stand between chaos and order often pay the ultimate price in defence of Nigeria’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Many die with little recognition beyond folded flags, grieving families, and silent prayers. They, too, are heroes of our democracy.

And then there is Leah Sharibu.
Her story transcends politics. In the face of terror, captivity, and unimaginable pressure, she remained steadfast in her convictions. Her courage speaks to the very essence of freedom; the right to believe, to worship, and to live according to one’s conscience without fear. Whether one shares her faith or not, her resilience embodies the ideals of a Nigeria where diversity is respected and freedom of belief is protected. She remains a symbol of what a truly free society should represent.

The President also stated that the responsibility of this generation is to sustain democracy and ensure prosperity. That responsibility is indeed ours. But democracy and prosperity cannot be improved by citizens alone. Government, institutions, civil society, and communities must all play their part.

For young Nigerians, sustaining democracy means participating, organizing, voting, advocating, innovating, and holding leaders accountable. For the government, sustaining democracy means ensuring that citizens can live, learn, work, and dream in safety.

For democracy is not merely the absence of military rule.
It is a mother who sleeps knowing her children will return safely from school.
It is a young girl who walks to class without fear.
It is a farmer who tills his land without the sound of gunfire in the distance.
It is a student whose ambition is greater than his anxiety.
It is a nation where hope travels farther than fear.

It is where the ballot carries more power than the bullet.
It is where disagreement does not become violence.
It is where diversity is not feared but celebrated.
It is where every citizen, regardless of faith, ethnicity, gender, or status, can live freely and with dignity.
It is where the dreams of young people are not interrupted by violence.

As Nigeria marks twenty-seven years of uninterrupted democracy, we must celebrate how far we have come. But we must also confront how far we still need to go. The true test of our democracy will not be measured only by the number of years it survives, but by the number of lives it secures, opportunities it creates, freedoms it protects, and dreams it preserves.

If young people are to believe in Nigeria, then Nigeria must become a country where believing is rewarded by evidence, not merely encouraged by words.
The task before this generation is not simply to sustain democracy. It is to deepen it, strengthen it, and make it meaningful for every citizen. And that journey begins with ensuring that every Nigerian can move freely, speak freely, worship freely, dream boldly, and live safely.
Only then can democracy truly fulfil its promise.

Barr. Jonathan Abakpa
Human Rights Lawyer

DEMOCRACY AND THE COURAGE TO BELIEVE