In a series of recent events, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu's administration has displayed a propensity for quick decision-making. However, these swift actions have raised questions and concerns about the administration's approach and its long-term implications.

First, the abrupt announcement of the removal of the fuel subsidy, which was subsequently revealed to have been omitted from the inaugural speech — underscores a lack of strategic foresight. While the previous government had already paved the way for this move, President Tinubu's administration missed an opportunity to proactively communicate the subsidy's removal and soften its impact on citizens. By taking its time to announce the dates and processes for both the removal and accompanying policies, the government could have projected a more deliberate, forward-thinking image.

A similar pattern unfolded just last week as ECOWAS, led by President Tinubu, issued a firm ultimatum to the military junta in Niger following the coup. While Nigeria's commitment to democratic values is laudable, this somewhat impulsive ultimatum overlooked potentially less costly diplomatic options.

Before the ultimatum was issued, due consideration should have been given to the African Union and the UN Security Council's stance on the matter. Both entities refrained from endorsing military intervention in Niger, instead emphasising the importance of non-violent solutions. These observations hold considerable significance and should have been addressed before the ECOWAS leaders decided on the ultimatum.

While taking a regional lead in restoring democracy is commendable, spearheading an effort that might involve an international illegality to counter another raises concerns about the quality of advice. This is because everyone with a basic understanding of international relations knows that declarations of military action must follow certain international protocols. Hence, all foreign policy decisions must be approached with meticulous analysis and measured steps.

The Niger ultimatum also exposes the administration's eagerness to appear proactive — potentially overshadowing the careful considerations required for such critical decisions. In this case, the threat of military action within seven days may have underestimated the simmering tensions after the coup, which further lends credence to the fact that we should have opted for diplomacy as a primary course of action, with the threat of military confrontation as our secondary option.

Nevertheless, the administration's swift moves remind us of the delicate balance between appearing decisive and enacting sound policies. The ‘recentness’ of these events also underscores the importance of patience and thorough analysis, particularly when regional stability and international relations hang in the balance.

It is undeniable that the Tinubu government faces immense pressure and seeks to project a proactive stance. However, there are moments when optics must yield to pragmatism. With millions of lives at stake, every government action demands a thorough consideration of its potential repercussions.

As Nigeria grapples with these decisions, one thing remains clear: the learning curve for President Tinubu's administration is ongoing, and it must quickly adapt to navigate the complexities of governance with a greater appreciation for the gravity of each choice.

I rest my case.