Beyond the diplomatic honeymoon

Also published in Daily Trust

In addition to the nationwide euphoria that trailed President Muhammadu Buhari’s historic election victory, the immediate and remarkable improvement of Nigeria’s global approval rating marked the beginning of his diplomatic honeymoon even before he actually assumed the presidency.

This particularly explains the diplomatic warmth between Nigeria and the major world powers ever since his inauguration almost two months ago.

Obviously, this is largely due to the relatively transparent hence the most credible presidential election ever conducted in the country, which he meritoriously won, and, of course, his personal reputation as a man of exceptional integrity, which has earned him special recognition within the country and beyond.

In any case, his just concluded four-day official visit to the United States of America where he met with his American counterpart, President Barack Obama, was perhaps the climax of his eventful diplomatic honeymoon period, partly due to the diplomatic significance of the visit, and partly due to the sheer diplomatic weight of the United States, being currently the most powerful country on earth.

Anyway, though it’s a common practice that once a new government comes into being, it enjoys diplomatic honeymoon period within which it receives well-wishes, offers of improved partnership for mutual interests and even pledges of assistance from some countries, depending, among other things, on the influence of the country and the credibility of the process that produced its new government, most of such offers and pledges are in reality mere empty diplomatic sweet-talks that hardly materialize, and even when they actually materialize, the purported benefactors ironically end up benefiting from it much more than the supposed beneficiary countries.

Yet, many new governments, especially in developing counties, get disproportionately carried away by such sugar-coated pledges of assistance and offers of beneficial partnership, and consequently commit themselves to some lopsided bilateral or multilateral commitments, hence end up being perpetually exploited economically and/or manipulated politically, by their purported benefactors. 

Now, since it’s obvious that the situation isn’t and won’t be different in Nigeria’s case either, President Buhari needs to be particularly cautious as he enjoys his diplomatic honeymoon, so that he doesn’t expose the country to further diplomatic manipulation by some foreign countries and other international economic and political vested interests, which have practically taken Nigeria for granted in pursuit of their individual and collective diplomatic agendas and other economic interests.

By the way, it’s pretty unfortunate that, perhaps with the exception of the Tafawa Balewa-led government, Murtala and Buhari military regimes in the 60s, 70s and 80s respectively, Nigeria has never pursued, or even seriously attempted to pursue, an independent foreign policy. Instead, it has always been a pawn in the global game of diplomacy where major powers have often manipulated it for their own interests.

For instance, the last two major instances of Nigeria’s poor diplomacy were shamelessly demonstrated at the United Nations in New York. The first instance was in December 2014, when Nigeria, as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, and apparently acting on the instructions of the United States and Israel, rejected a draft resolution designed to culminate in the end of the Israeli illegal occupation of the Palestinian land, and the eventual emergence of an independent Palestinian state within a 12-month transition period.

The second instance was earlier this month when Nigeria, also apparently acting on the instructions of Russia, undermined another draft resolution at the United Nations Security Council, which was intended to officially regard the massacre of the more than eight thousand Bosnian Muslims in the UN-declared safe haven of Srebrenica in Bosnia on July 11, 1995, by Bosnian Serb forces, as genocide, even though it was well documented and was unanimously believed to be the worst mass murder in Europe since the end of the World ll. Also despite the fact that it was committed while the UN peacekeeping forces (from the Netherlands) were supposedly protecting the city. Yet, Nigeria undermined the draft resolution by simply abstaining from voting.

Interestingly enough, while I am sure that those Nigerians who rightly criticized former President Jonathon for rejecting the first draft resolution are equally against Nigeria’s position with regard to the second draft resolution, their obvious reluctance to equally criticize President Buhari in this regard casts doubt on their objectivity, to say the least.

Therefore, President Buhari needs to modernize the country’s obsolete foreign policy, and shift the country’s diplomacy away from the dilemma of unrealistic idealism, where it has languished for decades, to principled but pragmatic diplomacy, in order to handle issues from the perspective of Nigeria’s strategic interests, of course without necessarily jeopardizing the interests of others.

This necessarily entails a radical overhaul of the country’s foreign policy. Our foreign policy strategists, if any, should wise up and realize that, Nigeria can generate appropriate amounts of benefits in its foreign relations, and, of course, appropriate recognition and respect among the international community only when it manages its foreign policy on the bases of mutual respect, and pursues the maximum achievable benefits in its relations with all countries, including developed countries. This is notwithstanding the disproportionate disparity in terms of economic strength, competitiveness and other development indices between it and the developed countries.

It also equally entails reviewing and reforming the country’s age-old foreign policy towards African countries, which is actually too concessionary to serve Nigeria’s strategic interests in the continent nowadays. Besides, it has simply outlived its purpose, which was apparently inspired by the country’s purported leadership in Africa simply because it is the most populous country in the continent and arguably the richest, though, ironically, with one of the worst-managed economies, unfortunately. In any case, this purported leadership is self-acclaimed anyway, and has practically eroded also.

Nigeria can reposition itself and restore its lost influence and glory in the global arena by formulating an integrated and pragmatic foreign policy that is particularly and primarily designed to protect and promote the country’s strategic interests, and pursue its diplomacy accordingly.