31/10/2025
Nigeria’s Political Leaders Should Learn from America
Leadership is not merely about holding political power; it is about responsibility, accountability, and the ability to act decisively in the best interest of citizens. Across the world, nations are defined not by the number of their politicians but by the quality of their governance. In the United States, political leaders are often held accountable to the people and the institutions that sustain democracy. By contrast, in Nigeria, leadership is often associated with self-preservation, negligence, and a failure to prioritize citizens’ welfare. The contrast between the two systems reveals deep lessons for Nigerian leaders, lessons that if adopted could redefine the nation’s political and economic trajectory.
A striking example of political accountability and leadership responsibility was captured in a statement made by former U.S. President Donald J. Trump during a government shutdown. In his message, Trump publicly expressed his frustration that government lawyers and opposing lawmakers were preventing the continuation of SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) payments to American citizens. Despite political opposition and legal barriers, Trump emphasized his unwillingness to let Americans go hungry, urged the courts for clarity, and called out the opposing party to “do the right thing” and “reopen the government.” Although Trump’s message was politically charged, it reflected an important dimension of governance: a leader’s direct communication with citizens and his demonstrated concern for their welfare, even amid bureaucratic constraints.
Donald Trump’s statement during the U.S. government shutdown is more than a partisan declaration, it is a reflection of democratic leadership in crisis. He openly confronted the challenges of governance, acknowledged the limitations of executive power, and sought legal clarification to ensure citizens did not suffer. His words “I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT” capture the urgency of leadership responsibility. In that moment, Trump positioned himself not merely as a political figure but as a representative of the people’s welfare.
Regardless of one’s political opinion about Trump, his willingness to address a national issue directly, take responsibility, and challenge institutional inertia demonstrates a core American democratic value: leadership is a public trust. Even when constrained by law or opposition, the American leader must act, communicate, and be seen as fighting for the people’s interest. This responsiveness forms part of the civic contract between elected officials and the governed, and it is reinforced by the constitutional mechanisms that allow citizens to demand answers, challenge leadership, and influence national discourse.
By contrast, in Nigeria, political communication during national crises often reflects detachment and arrogance. During fuel scarcity, economic hardship, or national insecurity, Nigerian leaders rarely address citizens with empathy or transparency. The leadership class hides behind bureaucratic silence, leaving citizens to interpret their suffering as normal. The lack of open communication is symptomatic of a deeper malaise: a leadership culture devoid of moral urgency and national responsibility.
The American democratic system, despite its imperfections, has institutionalized political accountability and transparency. The President, Congress, and the Judiciary function within a clearly defined separation of powers, each capable of checking the other. Most importantly, the American public expects transparency from its leaders. Every presidential action is scrutinized by the media, civil society, and citizens. Public officials are compelled to justify their policies and decisions not just in private meetings but before the nation.
Trump’s decision to publicly discuss the government’s inability to fund SNAP benefits reflects this accountability ethos. Rather than conceal the issue, he brought it into public view, taking both political risk and moral responsibility. In doing so, he reinforced a principle that leadership is answerable to the people. In America, when leaders fail to act or when their policies harm citizens, there are consequences: public outrage, media investigation, congressional hearings, and electoral backlash.
Furthermore, American leaders understand that governance is a public dialogue. The tradition of “State of the Union” addresses, press conferences, and direct public statements reinforces transparency. Leaders are expected to explain policies, admit challenges, and outline solutions. Even political controversies become platforms for accountability because the public space demands explanation.
Another aspect of American governance that Nigerian leaders should emulate is the institutional culture that compels legal and ethical scrutiny. In Trump’s statement, he acknowledged that government lawyers and courts had differing opinions about funding SNAP. Rather than bypass the law, he directed his team to seek judicial clarification. This act, simple as it may seem, illustrates respect for the rule of law and institutional process, two principles that are often ignored in Nigeria, where political leaders routinely disregard court orders, manipulate legal institutions, and use executive power to shield themselves from accountability.
Nigeria’s political class, over the years, has consistently failed to uphold the principles of public accountability and responsive governance. Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the country has witnessed recurring patterns of corruption, economic mismanagement, and disregard for citizens’ welfare. Leaders at both federal and state levels often treat governance as a private enterprise rather than a public service.
When crises arise whether fuel shortages, inflation, or strikes Nigerian leaders are more likely to issue vague statements than to engage directly with citizens. Unlike in the United States, where leaders must communicate the rationale behind their decisions, Nigerian politicians often act with impunity. Public funds are mismanaged with little or no consequence. Anti-corruption agencies like the EFCC and ICPC are politicized, used as tools against opponents rather than instruments of justice.
The absence of transparency is compounded by a lack of empathy. Many Nigerian politicians live in a world detached from the realities of their citizens. While millions struggle with hunger and unemployment, political elites spend lavishly on foreign medical trips, luxury vehicles, and unproductive projects. In times of national crisis, their first concern is political stability rather than human suffering.
For instance, during the COVID-19 lockdowns, millions of Nigerians were left without economic relief, while political office holders hoarded palliatives and manipulated distribution for political gain. This kind of behavior reflects not just corruption but moral bankruptcy a total disconnect from the responsibilities of leadership.
Even in the legislative sphere, accountability is minimal. Lawmakers pass budgets without adequate scrutiny, and oversight functions are compromised by personal interests. Instead of acting as guardians of the people’s welfare, Nigerian legislators often prioritize constituency allowances, committee privileges, and political loyalty. This failure of moral and institutional responsibility stands in sharp contrast to the accountability ethos displayed in Trump’s handling of the SNAP funding crisis.
The differences between American and Nigerian political cultures are rooted in institutional maturity, civic awareness, and leadership accountability. In America, political legitimacy depends heavily on performance and perception. A leader’s popularity can rise or fall based on how effectively they respond to citizens’ needs. The media, judiciary, and opposition parties serve as active watchdogs, ensuring that leaders remain answerable to the people.
In Nigeria, however, politics often operates as a closed system of patronage. Elections are manipulated, voters are bribed, and political parties serve as vehicles for self-enrichment rather than ideology. Consequently, leaders are rarely motivated by the fear of public accountability. The Nigerian electorate, weakened by poverty and misinformation, is easily pacified by ethnic and religious appeals. This disconnect between leadership and followership creates a cycle of mediocrity and impunity.
Another key difference lies in institutional integrity. In the U.S., institutions function beyond individual personalities. Whether Republican or Democrat, every leader is subject to institutional checks. The law is not easily bent for political convenience. Trump’s acknowledgment that he could not unilaterally fund SNAP because of conflicting court rulings shows a recognition of institutional limits. In Nigeria, however, leaders often treat the law as an instrument of power. Court judgments are ignored, constitutionality is undermined, and the rule of law is subordinated to political expediency.
The American example demonstrates that strong institutions and civic vigilance produce responsive governance. Nigerian leaders, by contrast, rely on weak institutions and public apathy to sustain corruption and inefficiency. This fundamental difference explains why American citizens can demand accountability and expect a response, while Nigerians are often met with silence, propaganda, or intimidation.
1. Accountability Begins with Communication
Nigerian leaders must learn to communicate directly and transparently with citizens. During crises, silence breeds mistrust. Just as Trump addressed the nation about the SNAP crisis, Nigerian presidents and governors should speak clearly about government challenges, policy directions, and citizens’ welfare. Leadership requires courage to face the people, not hide behind press releases or spokespersons.
2. Respect for Institutions and the Rule of Law
The strength of American democracy lies in institutional respect. Trump sought judicial clarification before funding SNAP; Nigerian leaders, in contrast, often violate court orders and undermine the judiciary. For Nigeria to progress, leaders must learn that democracy thrives only when laws are obeyed and institutions are independent.
3. Prioritizing Citizens’ Welfare Over Politics
Trump’s statement emphasized preventing hunger despite political gridlock. In Nigeria, political rivalry often supersedes public welfare. Leaders must learn to prioritize citizens’ survival above partisan interests. Governance should be about solving problems, not perpetuating political gamesmanship.
4. Moral Leadership and Empathy
A leader’s strength is measured not only by authority but by compassion. American presidents regardless of party routinely visit disaster zones, comfort victims, and demonstrate national solidarity. Nigerian leaders, however, are often absent during tragedies. Empathy should become a fundamental requirement for public office.
5. Strengthening Institutions and Civil Engagement
Nigeria’s democracy will remain fragile unless institutions are empowered to check abuses of power. Anti-corruption agencies, electoral commissions, and the judiciary must operate independently. Citizens, too, must play a role by demanding transparency and rejecting corrupt practices at every level of governance.
6. Promoting a Culture of Responsibility
In the United States, leaders are aware that their actions will be scrutinized and judged by history. In Nigeria, impunity thrives because leaders face no consequences. Nigerian politicians must internalize the idea that leadership is service, not entitlement. The office they hold is a public trust, and betraying that trust is a moral crime against the nation.
Nigeria’s democratic experiment is over two decades old, yet it remains crippled by corruption, weak institutions, and selfish leadership. The country’s problems are not merely economic or structural they are ethical and moral. Leadership in Nigeria has been reduced to a contest of greed rather than a platform for service. By contrast, the American political system despite its internal divisionsoperates on a foundation of accountability, transparency, and institutional respect.
Donald Trump’s public statement on SNAP funding during a government shutdown may have been politically charged, but it reflected a leader’s willingness to confront national problems, communicate openly, and seek legal solutions within democratic boundaries. Nigerian leaders, on the other hand, often hide behind political excuses, blame others for their failures, and neglect their responsibility to the people.
If Nigeria must rise from its cycle of poverty, corruption, and political decay, its leaders must begin to learn from examples like America’s. They must respect the rule of law, embrace transparency, prioritize citizens’ welfare, and understand that leadership is not about personal gain but about national duty. The day Nigerian leaders begin to govern with the consciousness that every decision affects millions of lives that day, democracy will cease to be a slogan and become a living reality. Until then, the contrast between America’s accountable leadership and Nigeria’s reckless politics will remain a mirror of what we could have been a great nation shackled not by destiny, but by the failures of its own leaders.
