Bearing in mind visibility and major developments in the international arena in the past eight years, diplomats and analysts maintain that the country has witnessed a dip in influence in African and West African sub-region affairs – no thanks to what experts describe as a domestic terrain that is completely overwhelmed with challenges of pervasive insecurity, terrorism, banditry, economic downturn and corruption. BOLA OLAJUWON and VINCENT IKUOMOLA report.
It the twilight of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration, many analysts on foreign affairs say it is taxing to weigh up the government’s foreign policy stance; especially when the performances of the administration and that of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are juxtaposed. The ministry is the country’s number one image-maker and marketer. Besides that, it is responsible for the implementation of the country’s foreign policy, which always reflects the stand of the country on issues.
However, the country, for ages, has been operating a foreign policy that places the African Continent high and above its immediate needs under what is termed “Africa is the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy,” meaning priority would be given to issues concerning Africa first. Nigeria wears the toga of “big brother” in Africa, which allows it to play a functional and important role in the sub-region, continent and the world. The “big brother” toga has seen Nigeria single-handedly restore peace to many troubled African countries by the snap of its fingers. But, in recent times, the country’s foreign policy has shifted to that of reciprocity and later economy.
Administration’s projections
President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration came on board with a promise to restructure the embassies and ensure they are functional.
In addition, there were plans to also close some of the embassies and introduce what the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama, called smart embassies so as to push further the country’s shift to economic diplomacy. According to Onyeama, foreign policy is to transform the country economically to become competitive in the global marketplace. To achieve this, the minister said there would be a re-orientation of the country’s foreign engagements to promote economic development by making the ministry a hub to facilitate direct market access for businesses and trades to 119 markets around the world.
So, the ultimate aim was to transform the ministry into an effective agency for Nigerian trade promotion. The minister also spoke about the plan to put in place some mechanisms to change how Nigerians do business and the way people do business with us – the Ease of Doing Business. The minister also promised a functional portal that any Nigerian business can upload to and be accessible at all 119 embassies.
Hence, major developments and activities on the international front in the eight years of Buhari’s administration have been around the visibility of the President. Hardly is there an international engagement where the presence of Nigeria is required that does not get representation. The President attended many international engagements, likewise his Minister of Foreign Affairs. President Buhari had travelled over 50 times, a number that the minister said was too small, being the country’s number one salesman. Onyeama had wished the President could do more of such trips because of their economic and security significance to the country.
In the area of the fight against corruption, the President became the face of anti-corruption on the continent as he was crowned anti-corruption champion. He was also praised for Nigeria’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. The minister also spoke about the plan to do comprehensive auditing with the aim of having a roadmap for the ministry.
The administration did well in evacuating Nigerians stranded outside the country, first during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and also during the South African xenophobia crisis. The government moved fast in ensuring that Nigerians who wanted to return to the country were evacuated at the government’s expense. The same feat was repeated at the beginning of the Ukraine crisis and the ongoing Sudanese crisis where thousands of Nigerians were evacuated.
Achievements and unmet expectations
About eight years in the saddle, the government has not been able to achieve its outlined plans. The Minister of Foreign Affairs only recently said the plan to reduce the number of the country’s missions abroad could not fly because it cost more to shut down the missions/embassies than to run them, which is a reflection that the idea was not well-thought-out before coming up with it.
Many have also questioned the economic benefits of many foreign trips of the President and the minister to the country. Given that one of the supposed gains was the agreement with Morocco to establish a fertiliser factory in Nigeria, the promise of the factory became an allure that would have earned the North African country membership of the Economic Community of West African States but for the Council of wise men who decided to keep the idea on hold.
So, in the area of bilateral trade, the country did not meet its numerous expectations. There were no new trade vistas opened nor has the country’s export increased. In the eight years, the country witnessed lots of companies leaving the country, which is a sign of the country’s inability to maintain a friendly and enabling environment for businesses to strive. This is in contrast to the much-talked-about ease of doing business.
Many experts also believe that President Buhari’s lead of the country’s foreign foray did not also show sparkles in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) sub-region, where forceful takeover of government is gradually becoming the order of the day. Currently, some member states are under military rule and Nigeria and ECOWAS have been gentle with the people working against democracy in the sub-region. The joke out there is that ECOWAS has lost its bite as Nigeria has suddenly stopped barking under Buhari’s administration. The big brother factor has given way with new competitors emerging almost on a daily basis. Ghana now takes delight in buffeting Nigerians at will and there are no consequences. South Africa and some other countries now dare Nigeria. However, it is not all failure all through in the eight years.
Diplomats and analysts speak
The former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and former ambassador to Ethiopia, Ambassador Bulus Lolo said it was not easy to describe the foreign policy of the outgoing government. To him, the administration’s foreign policy management has been a mixed bag. “Recalling how the President started in 2015, he said the first week of his assumption of office, he travelled to Niger Republic, Chad and Germany. This demonstrated the personal involvement of Mr President in foreign policy management; given that when he travelled, he met with other leaders, especially at the G-7 Summit.
“In 2015, he was invited by the G-7, which was a mark of recognition of his person, and the expectation they had with the promise that Nigeria will turn a new leaf. If you remember too, the Jonathan administration had become an administration that the West did not want to do business with. But when President Buhari came, the West again reset the button.
“But down the line, our foreign policy has sometimes lost its clarity. One could not say what direction Nigeria was really going. There were moments when we thought we would hear the voice of Nigeria loud and clear. It wasn’t forthcoming. And then, add to the domestic problems that bedeviled that administration. Notably, the significant rise in terrorism, kidnapping that reached heights that were unprecedented and the general deterioration in the communities where farmers and herders were frequently fighting and killing one another. This did not project the country well in the external arena.
“So, I would say that we now have a foreign policy that is mixed in its outlook. We want a Nigeria whose voice others would look up to as authentic. We want a Nigeria that is sure of itself; a Nigeria that is at ease and a Nigeria that can point and project an example for others to follow.
On whether the President has achieved much through his foreign policy with other countries and bodies, he said: “When President Buhari was elected in 2015, he was seen as someone who was trustworthy, even as he was elected in a free, fair, credible and transparent election. At the time, he was seen to have won the trust of the majority of Nigerians. He equally enjoyed the best integrity that many spoke of. At the international level, trust and integrity are the commodities that a leader that has them enjoys great support and respect. The personae and perception over trust and integrity, which are two sides of the same coin, we must not take them for granted; the level of trust that people have and you’re seen to be trustworthy and you have integrity as well.
“To a great extent, the President, in that regard, held himself well. But, there are strata in his government that would have done better and because he’s the head, if there’s a knock on any agency of government, invariably they say, the buck stops at the boss’ desk.
“Therefore, people will point to the type of leadership that he brought. But by and large, we came out of the perception of Nigeria as a pariah state. I don’t know now what the assessment is out there, given that we are sharply divided in our country. We allowed certain sentiments to override our objective paths to development. We have put a premium on things that hinder rather than make for greater unity and collaboration in the country and I hope that this is an area where the incoming administration will pay greater attention to.”
A former Nigerian Ambassador to Mexico, Ambassador Ogbole Amedo Ode scored the Buhari administration low in the area of security and anti-corruption. Ode, a former spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the President had campaigned with the promise to tackle security and corruption. But eight years down the line, he said the President has failed to deliver on his promises. “During his campaign for election to Aso Villa and at the inception of his administration in 2015, Buhari harped on the catchword of ‘Change.’ These included fighting corruption and insecurity and growing the economy through employment creation. Indeed, he promised to create three million jobs on a yearly basis.
“Nearly eight years down the line, the facts speak loudly to the scenarios that have emerged in our national space. Buhari’s anti-corruption fight rests on a tripod: Implementation of Treasury Single Account (TSA), Biometric Verification Number (BVN) and the Whistle Blowing Policy. These have received commendations. And there has, indeed, been an increase in savings. However, corruption still remains a hydra-headed monster in our body politics.
“The security situation has been regarded by pundits as worse. From Boko Haram in the Northeast, banditry and kidnapping across the length and breadth of Nigeria have become a daily reality. On the economy, being categorised as the ‘poverty capital of the world’ is not a compliment! And the re-designing of currency under Godwin Emefiele’s Central Bank governorship dealt with the national economy, especially, smallholder companies that depend on daily cash flow,” the diplomat said.
Also, an academic, author and the third Vice Chancellor of Federal University Oye Ekiti, Ekiti State, Prof. Kayode Soremekun, said it was unfortunate that Nigeria’s foreign policy did not fit into the catastrophic scenario or address the apocalyptic situation of the current proxy war between Washington and Moscow, which, he added, speaks to the dangerous game between the status-quo forces in the international system.
“Specifically, these forces are the United States and her allies on one hand and Russia on the other. It is a dangerous situation, which has the capacity for an escalation which can easily destroy the world! The relevant questions here are: How does Nigeria fit into this catastrophic scenario? How should our foreign policy address this apocalyptic situation? Our best and desired option is non-alignment. But non-alignment is best pursued on the platform of coherence and strength. Unfortunately, under the Presidency of Buhari, this coherence and strength are largely missing. This is because Nigeria has been laid low by features such as insecurity and poverty. In other words, to use a familiar phrase no man can argue on his knees. So, non-alignment as a policy cannot be meaningfully pursued.
“Incidentally, it is this lack of direction which characterises Nigeria’s foreign policy under the Buhari administration. The country, unfortunately, continues to punch below her presumed demographic weight. She is almost invisible in world affairs, whereas this is a big and populous country that should be at the barricades in international relations. To illustrate what is being said here, the U.S. Vice-President Kamala Harris recently visited Africa and even Ghana next door, but she studiously ignored Nigeria.”
The Professor of Comparative International Relations again lamented that too many voices continue to speak for Nigeria on the world stage. “For instance, the recent attempts to repatriate our nationals from Sudan reflect this kind of situation. Too many and various agencies were involved in this exercise; whereas the various agencies should have sub-ordinated themselves to our Ministry of Foreign Affairs which is the only entity that has the legitimate capacity to speak for Nigeria.
“The suspicion here is that since huge resources were involved in this Sudan episode, other state agencies attempted to elbow out the legitimate entity – the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” Prof. Soremekun said.
A Research Fellow with the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Dr Tola Ilesanmi, submitted that Buhari’s eight-year administration has been characterised by a shallow and predominantly reactive foreign policy. “This is exacerbated by a domestic terrain that is completely overwhelmed with challenges of insecurity, terrorism, economic downturn and unprecedented levels of corruption. Daunting domestic challenges and foreign engagements that focused essentially on fighting insecurity and seeking economic assistance within a climate of insecurity greatly dwarfed Nigeria’s international image and clout.
“Nigeria’s place and position as the Giant of Africa did not receive any form of boost during this period; except, of course, for Nigerians that were appointed into leadership positions in some global and international organisations. They include Mr Akinwumi Adesina of the African Development Bank, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of the World Trade Organisation, and Ms Amina Mohammed, UN Deputy Secretary-General.
“Nigeria’s voice in Africa has been silenced by the cacophony of domestic challenges, while her pride of place in Africa and, indeed, the world as the largest economy in Africa and a middle power is slowly being lost.”
