Follow Us on Google
The 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA 81) held at a time of uptick in global conflicts and increasing fragmentation occasioned by regional tensions. There were intense debates about levelling the playing field in the international system and also, the sidelines witnessed a flurry of searches for a successor to the outgoing Secretary-General, António Guterres.
As would be expected, the gathering was not spared of drama, melodrama protests, and tough-talking speeches. The US President Donald Trump bashed the International Criminal Court (ICC) and urged the 125 member states of the Rome Statue to withdraw their membership from the body. He received an instantaneous pushback in defence of ICC by European nations led by the Netherlands’ Prime Minister, Rob Jetten. Besides, as Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu made his way to the podium, delegates from 77 countries (Arab -18, Asia &Turkey-14, Non-Arab Africa-20, Latin America and the Caribbean-17, Europe – 6, Oceania-2) staged a walkout against the euphemisms of military offensives in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran by Israel. Netanyahu shrugged it off and referred to the dissenters as “moral cowards.”
On the other hand, while Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshikan carpeted the US and Isreal for the continued aggression in his country, Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy rallied international support against Vladimir Putin of Russia by calling for severe sanctions that would cut off Russia’s oil revenues which enable Moscow to sustain the war. In similar theatrics, Pakistan shifted its hostility with India to the floor of UNGA over attempts to go against Indus Water Treaty by the latter.
But beyond the visceral reactions, a common thread in the speeches of the Global South were issues around climate justice, sovereign debt overhang, discriminatory credit rating, extraction of critical minerals without beneficiation, and reform of the UN system to ensure inclusivity, especially for Africa. I took special interest in watching and listening to the speeches made by the leading countries from the five African regions: Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Kenya, and Democratic Republic of Congo. I also listened to the speech by the Ghanaian president for comparable reasons. Africa has 1.5 billion people. It parades slightly above 19% of the total global population. The World Economic Forum had projected that by year 2030, its youthful population would constitute 42% of young people on earth. The continent is also reputed for commanding the biggest regional voting bloc in UNGA. And with about 30% reserves of the world’s critical minerals, Africa is an indispensable powerhouse in the global march to clean energy transition.
However, my observation is that Nigeria, the so-called giant of Africa, disappointed very highly in the just concluded UNGA. Nigeria’s speech was hackneyed and unmoving as a competitor for the membership of UN Security Council (UNSC). Over the years, Nigeria, South Africa and Egypt had been in contest as per which country would take the permanent seat slot for Africa in the UNSC, when and if it is granted. But Nigeria has lately become a butt of jokes. The country has suffered a great deal of setback in terms of intangible leadership positioning. Just like domestic politics, optics are critical in diplomacy. What you do at home has a way of projecting strength or weakness internationally. It is not only the image crisis created by President Tinubu ‘s request for his past records in FBI to remain classified, but the way his handlers managed the heat from the opposition as if common sense cannot ordinarily separate the wheat from the chaff.
It is a standard practice for presidents or heads of state to send prime ministers, vice presidents, or foreign ministers to stand in for their countries at UNGA. In the just concluded UNGA, for instance, the foreign ministers of South Africa and Egypt represented their countries, just like some other countries across the world’s regions. So, Vice President Kashim Shettima’s representation should not have been an issue. But it was initially muddled up by the Nigerian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Jimoh Ibrahim, who in a bid to pooh-pooh the opposition, had bragged that President Tinubu would not only attend this year’s UNGA but would also sit in the first row with President Donald Trump. That statement set up the country for ridicule as seating arrangement at UNGA is based on English alphabetical protocol, and Nigeria is nowhere close to the US, in that order. Thus, in diplomacy and strategy, credibility is engendered when you promise less and deliver more. Writing about ‘Diplomacy’ in Chapter 31 of Hans J. Morgenthau’s Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, he charged diplomats to, “Never put yourself in a position from which you cannot retreat without losing face and from which you cannot advance without grave risks.” In this case, Ambassador Jimoh embarrassed the nation and raised eyebrows on Mr. President’s absence.
In my assessment, the speeches by Kenya and Ghana were the best from Africa. Kenya is a new entrant to the race for UNSC seat and it had shown preliminary capacity through the power of persuasion. “African does not come to plead. We come to propose. African resources must become the beginning of African industry, not the end of African contribution to the value chain. Extraction defined too much of our past. Investment must underpin the future,” Kenya’s president William Ruto said. But he needs to govern well at home to walk the talk.
The speech by the president of Ghana, John Mahama was exceptional because it had what was lacking in other speeches from Africa. It placed the people and democratic tenets at the centre of public governance. “Democracy loses its soul when it protects elite privileges while abandoning the vulnerable. Ghana remains an uncompromising beacon of constitutional democracy, media freedom, the rule of law, and peaceful transitions of power on the African continent,” Mahama noted. Indeed, countries that seek to project overarching influence in the international system must prioritise human security, and not just high GDP growth and big foreign reserves without corresponding improvements on the lives of the people.
