Yoruba Union Accuses Tinubu of “Weaponising Hardship” as Economic Strain and Insecurity Deepen in Nigeria

Yoruba Union Accuses Tinubu of “Weaponising Hardship” as Economic Strain and Insecurity Deepen in Nigeria

A Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Ìgbìnmó Májékóbájé Ilé-Yorùbá, has launched one of its sharpest attacks yet on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, accusing his administration of turning economic pain into a political instrument and leaving Nigerians reduced to what it described as a desperate struggle for a “cup of rice” while insecurity worsens across the country. The criticism, carried in recent reports and linked to statements by the union’s leadership, reflects widening frustration over the social cost of Tinubu’s reforms and the continuing violence that has shaken multiple parts of Nigeria in recent months. 

The union, whose recent interventions have repeatedly targeted the presidency, has presented the crisis as both economic and moral. In earlier and related statements, the group, led publicly by Convener Olusola Badero and released through Home Director Princess Balogun, accused Tinubu of failing to halt kidnappings, killings and rural attacks while ordinary citizens absorb the consequences of inflation, fuel price increases and collapsing purchasing power. Its language has become increasingly severe, portraying a government it says is detached from the suffering in homes, markets and farming communities.

The charge that Tinubu has “weaponised hardship” lands in a country still adjusting to two defining policy moves of his presidency: the removal of petrol subsidies in 2023 and the liberalisation of the foreign exchange market. The government has consistently defended those steps as unavoidable corrections to a distorted economy, and international financial institutions have broadly credited the reforms with improving reserves, narrowing the fiscal deficit and helping stabilise headline indicators. The World Bank said this week that Nigeria’s economy is expected to grow by 4.2 percent in 2026, while Reuters reported that inflation had fallen to 15.06 percent in February from much higher levels seen in late 2024. The IMF’s country profile for Nigeria also projects real GDP growth of 4.4 percent in 2026.

Yet the macroeconomic argument has done little to soften public anger. Even where headline inflation has eased, prices remain far above what millions of households can comfortably bear, and the political meaning of the union’s “cup of rice” phrase is clear: Nigerians may be hearing that the numbers are improving, but many still feel poorer. That gap between macroeconomic stabilisation and lived experience is at the centre of the current backlash. The World Bank has warned that rising costs still threaten incomes and poverty reduction, while public debate in Nigeria remains dominated by the price of food, transport and energy. 

The government’s answer has been that hardship is real but temporary. Tinubu and his allies have repeatedly argued that painful reforms are necessary to secure long-term recovery. In recent statements, the president has said his administration is making resources available to deal with terrorism and banditry while also promising to ease economic pressure. His government has expanded cash transfer plans, with officials saying the Household Prosperity and Empowerment Cash Transfer Programme is being scaled up from 9.2 million to 15 million beneficiaries. Supporters of the administration insist that these measures show the state is trying to cushion the blow of reform rather than ignore it. 

But the union’s intervention also draws force from the security emergency unfolding alongside the cost-of-living crisis. On April 9, Brigadier General Oseni Omoh Braimah and several soldiers were killed in an assault on a military base in Borno State, underlining the persistence of jihadist violence in the northeast. In the past two weeks alone, deadly attacks have also been reported in Plateau, Benue, Kaduna and Niger states. International concern has deepened: the United States on April 9 expanded its travel warning for Nigeria and authorised the departure of non-emergency embassy staff and their families from Abuja because of worsening security conditions.

That convergence of hunger and fear is what makes the union’s message resonate beyond partisan politics. Across the north and parts of the Middle Belt, insecurity has disrupted farming, trade and transport, compounding food stress in a country where households already spend a large share of their income on basic survival. Human Rights Watch said in its 2026 world report that insecurity remained prevalent in 2025, pointing to deadly attacks in Borno, kidnappings and raids in the northwest, and continuing intercommunal violence in the north-central region. Amnesty International has similarly warned of repeated state failure to protect vulnerable communities in places such as Benue. 

The criticism is especially politically sensitive because Tinubu is himself a Yoruba leader whose rise was historically tied to claims of democratic struggle, organisational discipline and federal reach. For a Yoruba organisation to accuse him of failing both his region and the country broadens the significance of the dispute. The same union has in previous statements accused him of prioritising family, cronies and image management over public welfare, and of remaining silent or ineffective while violent groups expand their reach into parts of Yorubaland and neighbouring states. Those claims are politically charged, but they speak to a deeper fear in the southwest that insecurity once viewed as distant is moving closer to home. 

The administration and its defenders reject the wider narrative of collapse. Officials and ruling party figures argue that the state inherited structural imbalances that could no longer be sustained and that the current pain reflects delayed but necessary correction. They also point to evidence of improved business activity, a lower fiscal deficit and a debt ratio that has begun to ease. From that standpoint, the real question is whether Nigeria can hold public patience long enough for reform gains to become visible in wages, prices, jobs and security. 

For now, however, the political battlefield is being shaped less by reform theory than by everyday distress. When a union says Nigerians have been reduced to a “cup of rice,” it is not merely making a rhetorical flourish; it is distilling a public mood in which small quantities of food, modest transport fares and daily safety have become markers of national decline. Tinubu still argues that the worst is passing and that breakthroughs are emerging. But as long as families face elevated prices and communities continue to bury victims of attacks, criticism like this will retain force. The Yoruba Union’s outburst is therefore not just another opposition broadside. It is a warning that, in Nigeria’s current moment, economic credibility and security credibility can no longer be separated. 

📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews