Follow Us on Google
• Want foreign policy issues in front burner of political campaigns
Emma Emeozor [email protected], @Emekaili
AS Nigeria celebrates its 60th independence anniversary, one question on the lips of the citizens is how the country’s foreign policy has performed over the decades. Opinions remain divided over the gains of the foreign policy of successive governments. Some analysts have argued that Nigeria’s foreign policy lost steam after the demise of the first republic. At the time, Africa was the centrepiece of the country’s foreign policy thrust, this is even as government officials disagree, saying there is much to write home about Nigeria’s foreign policy. In this report, International Relations pundits appraise the country’s foreign policy since independence.
Former Director General, Nigeria Nigerian Institute of International Affairs and President/Director General of the Bolytag Centre for International Diplomacy and Strategic Studies, Professor Bola A. Akinterinwa: After giving a brief background of Nigeria’s foreign policy, Akinterinwa calls for a dignifying foreign policy. His words: “In 1960, Nigeria had a foreign policy with Africa as its foundation and cornerstone. The foundation was enlarged in 1976 with the re-conceptualisation of cornerstone to become the centrepiece, meaning that Africa, considered in all its ramifications, should be given priority attention in Nigeria’s foreign policy-making, especially at the politico-economic, defence, and security levels.
“In this regard, emphasis was placed on protection of black dignity and defence of the black man in international relations. The dynamics of this policy are not far-fetched: the obnoxious policy of apartheid in South Africa, which was considered a taint on the person of a black man; discrimination against the black man in the world; East-West Cold War, which later prompted Nigeria’s membership of the Non-Aligned Movement; decolonisation of all dependent countries in Africa; Nigeria’s petroleum boom and doom; etc
“In 2020, Nigeria’s foreign policy is no more. Foreign policy was both reactive and programmatic, because there was a focus: anti-apartheid policy was “no compromise with apartheid.’’ All holders of Nigerian passport were obligated to fight apartheid tooth and nail with whatever means available to them. This obligation was clearly written in the inner back cover of every Nigerian pass-port by that time. In 1994, apartheid was dismantled and there is no more apartheid-driven focus.“In the same vein, the Non-alignment Movement has become a living dead body as the East-West Cold War has been thrown into the dustbin of history.
“In fact, the Nigeria of 1960 in which there were efforts to build a New Nigeria nation, where no man was oppressed and in which political governance was largely predicated on constitutionalism and more than mere constitutional democracy, is no more as at today. In 2020, constitutionalism has been replaced with diplomacy without focus. And without any whiff of doubt, we can say truly that Nigeria was a country and that in 2020, Nigeria only exists on white paper. Life has been taken out of it, thanks to unending insecurity. Consequently, foreign policy is, at best, reactive to spontaneous international events in which Nigeria’s interest is at stake. No focus, most unfortunately. Foreign policy has been characterised by self-deceit in which Government is now wrapped up in the glory of self-belief that promoting the election of Nigerians in some international organisation is a big achievement.
“At 60, Nigeria needs to put a stop to self-deceit and self-glorification and begin today the foundation for a dignifying foreign policy, by especially looking at the grandeur of a Nigeria that will be completely free from political chicanery and toga of irrationalities, to enable Nigeria’s Foreign Service Officers provide foreign policy leadership in Africa, as well as allow foreign policy to be a major instrument of national development in Nigeria.”
Former Special Advisor, National Security Affairs to the National Security Adviser in the Presidency under three consecutive Nigerian governments and former Director, Human Resources, Inspectorate and Management Services, Foreign Affairs ministry, Dr Dan Mou: Following the new wave of terrorism like that of Islamic State which brought a lot of security problems across the world, the government of President Goodluck Jonathan took the initiative to appoint a national security officer to go to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, of which the mantle fell on Mou. During the period, he visited Nigeria’s Embassies and High Commissions that were not in secure places, giving them (including Nigerians in Diaspora) security advice. He is the author of ‘National Security and Foreign Policy in Post-Military Rule Nigeria.’
Commenting on Nigeria’s foreign policy at 60, Mou said there are three models of foreign policy and that Nigeria is practising a relatively autonomous foreign policy for reason of its middle level economy. He blames lack of political stability, economic viability, military might, for the country’s inability to promote autonomous foreign policy. He, however, disagree with analysts who say Nigeria has lost its glory and has become an underdog in the international community. Hear him: “The truth is that the cardinal principle of any foreign policy is that the national interest is paramount. The ideal situation is that every country should consider its national interest first. Foreign policy is nothing other than promoting your own national interest in the international environment. However, in the actual global arrangement as it is in the moment, three models of foreign policies exist: 1. The autonomous foreign policy: There are nations that have autonomous foreign policy . . . major nations like the former Soviet Union, the United States and China.
“These are nations that can decide on what to do with minimal obstruction from anywhere because their economic is strong, their power structure is strong, they have the military might that makes it possible for their opinion to be accepted in important international fora such as the United Nations, the European Union, etc. 2. There are those countries that have relatively autonomous foreign policy such as middle level countries where Nigeria belong and 3. There are those that have totally dependent foreign policy such as the Francophone countries because France dictates the kind of Foreign policy and the position they take on international issues. “What this means is that until a country improves its domestic situation and there is political stability, economic viability and the military might that can pursue that kind of foreign policy and also vote money for that kind of foreign policy, you will realise that you may be talking about the an independent foreign policy that caters for the interest of your nation. But if a country don’t have the well withal, it don’t have a military might, it don’t have economic power, it don’t have the political clout in the global system, it will end having to manage with a relatively independent or relatively autonomous foreign policy which Nigeria has been trying to do.
“But as Nigeria’s economic fortune, internal unity and security improve, it will give us more confidence to be able to have an autonomous foreign policy which is a long term project. But for the time being, the best we can do is to try to have a relatively autonomous foreign policy so that we are not totally oppressed like the Francophone countries”
Don, Department of Political Science, University of Lagos, Dr. Ferdinand Otto:
Otto believes that successive governments since independence have performed creditably in the area of foreign policy. He says Nigerians have low knowledge of the country’s foreign policy and blames the situation on the failure of political parties and public office seekers to put foreign policy in the front burner of campaigns (and debates) as done in Europe and America.
Asked to identify the changes in Nigeria’s foreign policy between 1960 and today, Otto was confident when he said: “Our foreign policy has not changed except for what we call change in continuity. The basic principles of our foreign policy still remain. But the objective of the foreign policy of each administration changes. So, I would say that in the last 60 years we have been consistently pursuing African foreign policy and we have also continued to maintain multilateral diplomacy.
“We have not changed that policy . . . all the regimes (administrations), from 1960 up till date have always maintained that foreign policy thrust.”
