Boko Haram and Nigeria's foreign relations

Also published in Daily Trust

The controversy generated a few months ago by some western countries’ offers to assist Nigeria in its war against Boko Haram terrorists, which some Nigerians welcomed with high expectations while others who – having suspected conspiracies behind it – rejected, has finally died down after it appeared that the West would not commit combat troops on the ground after all.

Besides, even the intelligence gathering assistance they later pledged to provide has turned out to be much below expectation, having probably realized that the crisis does not pose any serious threat to their economic and other strategic interests in the country and the West African sub-region, at least for now and perhaps for the foreseeable future. This explains the apparent failure of the purported intelligence assistance they are ostensibly giving to Nigeria in its struggle to contain the crisis.

It is unfortunate that, despite the persistent loss of innocent lives and properties, and indiscriminate displacement of thousands of people from their towns, villages and settlements across the worst affected sub-region, the North-East, and the unbearable human suffering caused by the crisis, the conscience (if any) of the international community has failed to inspire effective commitment to help Nigeria tackle it. Moreover, the situation is not likely to change as long as the crisis remains largely confined within the sub-region and doesn’t seem to threaten the economic interests of the so-called western political powers, especially in oil and other strategic sectors in the country and the wider region at large.

This is in spite of the fact that Nigeria is clearly in dire need of urgent and effective foreign intelligence and military assistance in order to tackle this deteriorating security situation. After all, due to the apparent cluelessness and confusion at the leadership level, which has seriously affected the morale of the country’s struggling and exhausted security forces fighting the insurgents on the ground, the increasingly audacious Boko Haram insurgents have been proving too strong for the country’s military and other security personnel to handle. For instance, while Nigerian forces were engaged in a fierce battle to recapture Damboa town, which was captured by the insurgents some weeks ago, some media reports said the insurgents have also overrun Gwoza community and reportedly slaughtered many civilians while the whereabouts of the emir remains unknown.

Anyway, though securing international commitment to intervene is achievable, Nigeria, unfortunately, lacks the diplomatic dynamism and effective foreign policy required to mobilize adequate global interest in the lingering crisis. In the modern world’s largely morality-free international politics and hypocritical diplomacy, hopeful and ambitious countries exploit whatever resources, potential or advantages they have, be it economic, political, geographical, demographical etc., to pursue their interests and achieve their strategic goals.

Yet, despite the overwhelming influence of some European, American and Asian world powers on international affairs, for example, the United States and its western allies as well as Russia and China, many smaller and relatively disadvantaged countries, which are nonetheless focused and serious enough, have always managed to protect their national interests and even extract some valuable economic and/or political concessions from such major countries.

They have achieved this, having managed to integrate their national security interests, economic wellbeing and other strategic interests into the intricate global equation of the conflicting yet indispensably interdependent interests of the major world powers.

For instance, despite its incredibly tiny population of less than 300,000, the superfluously rich state of Qatar, which is the world’s richest country per capita thanks to its huge natural gas and oil resources, has, to a large extent, managed to successfully assert itself on the international political stage and become a significant player in international politics, notwithstanding the objectivity or otherwise of the agenda it pursues or promotes. Its popular international satellite television news network, Aljazeera, has always been very instrumental in its efforts and ability to achieve this feat.

Similarly, North Korea and Iran, among few other countries, have successfully withstood the largely hostile western policies towards them, by taking advantage of their respective advantages to secure, protect and promote their strategic interests. Iran is particularly “sagacious” in this regard, having managed to coat its Persian Zoroastrian agenda with Shiism cloak.

Anyway, though Nigeria has what it takes in terms of resources and potential to not only mobilize appropriate amount of international interest and support to help tackle Boko Haram but also pursue and achieve its strategic goals in other aspects, its leaders are obviously oblivious of the necessary know-how to achieve it. Besides, the country does not have purposeful foreign policy let alone definite and practicable diplomatic mechanisms to pursue it in today’s increasingly sophisticated politics of international relations. This is even though there are presumably specialized public institutions in the country, which are expected to, among other things, review, update and propose such policies regularly, like the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies and, of course, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Moreover, Nigeria doesn’t have standard media that can sufficiently and efficiently cover the whole country let alone a world-class international satellite television network to even counter the largely negative reports about it and launder its battered image internationally.

As it has always exposed Nigeria’s shortcomings and failures in various aspects of leadership, the lingering Boko Haram security quagmire underscores the urgent need to review and reform the country’s foreign policy and indeed harness all its strategic policies in such a way that they complement each other and effectively guide the country’s endeavour to meet the legitimate expectations of its increasingly disappointed citizens.