Emma Emeozor

• Continued from Monday, October 5

Former special advisor on National Security Affairs to the National Security Adviser in the Presidency, under three consecutive Nigerian governments, and former director of human resources, Inspectorate and Management Services, Foreign Affairs Ministry, Dr. Dan Mou. He is the author of ‘National Security and Foreign Policy in Post-Military Rule Nigeria.’

Commenting, Mou said there are three models of foreign policy: autonomous foreign policy, relatively autonomous foreign policy and dependent foreign policy. According to him, Nigeria is practising a relatively autonomous foreign policy and that is because of its middle-level economy.

He blamed lack of political stability, economic viability and military might for the country’s inability to practise autonomous foreign policy. He, however, disagreed with analysts who have argued that Nigeria has lost its glory and is now an underdog in the international community.

Hear him: “The truth is that the cardinal principle of any foreign policy is the national interest of the country. In an ideal situation, every country considers its national interest first. Foreign policy is nothing other than promoting a country’s national interest in the international environment.

“In the global arrangement, as it is at the moment, three models of foreign policy exist: autonomous foreign policy, relatively autonomous and dependent foreign policy. Major nations like the former Soviet Union, the United States and China practise autonomous foreign policy. These are nations that can decide on what to do with minimal obstruction from anywhere because their economy and power structure are 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.

“Then there are countries that practise a relatively autonomous foreign policy such as those with middle-level economy. This is where Nigeria belongs. Some countries have totally ‘dependent’ foreign policy, such as the Francophone countries in Africa. France dictates policies and the position they take on international issues.

“What this means is that, except a country improves its domestic situation and there is political stability, economic viability as well as military might, it cannot pursue an autonomous foreign policy. Of course, it has to vote money to carry out this kind of foreign policy. I am talking about an independent foreign policy that caters for the interest of a nation.

“But if a country does not have the wherewithal . . . military might, economic power, or political clout in the global system, it will end up having to manage with a relatively dependent or a relatively autonomous foreign policy, which Nigeria has been trying to do.

As Nigeria’s economic fortunes, internal unity and security improve, it will have more confidence to pursue an autonomous foreign policy.  This 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 blamed the low knowledge of citizens on the country’s foreign policy on the failure of political parties and public office seekers to put foreign policy on the front burner of campaigns as in Europe and America.

Asked if the thrust of Nigeria’s foreign policy since 1960 has changed, Otto was affirmative when he said: “Our foreign policy has not changed, except for what we call ‘change-in-continuity.’ The basic principles of our foreign policy are still the same 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 Africa as the centrepiece of our foreign policy. We have also continued to maintain multilateral diplomacy.”

Related News

He was also quick to add: “I would say that, in the last 20 years, under the civil administration, our foreign policy has not been given so much bite as it used to be. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, in his first and second terms in office, tried to rebrand Nigeria’s image because the country had been under the military for many years.

“But after his administration, our foreign policy has not actually shown the vibrancy it was known for. This was obvious under former President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. And the reason is because of the conduct of the 2007 election, which was not acceptable to the international community, though he (Yar’Adua) pledged to reform the country’ electoral system.

“I cannot really say that Nigeria continued to maintain those international principles under former President Goodluck Jonathan’s government. The government was caught up with the issue of insurgency, which became a global issue. The Jonathan administration’s cardinal objective was the issue of economic prosperity (transformation), like other administrations had always been pursuing economic diplomacy.”

Otto, however, thinks differently about the President Muhammadu Buhari administration. He said: “President Buhari’s administration, in the last five years, set out to pursue three major issues, which are domestic and at the same time international: combating terrorism, economic development and the fight against corruption. These have been the cardinal objectives of the regime.

“If you ask me to what extent those objectives have been achieved, I would not say that the government has performed badly. But our internal politics often affect our international image. We are not addressing most issues the way we should. We see those problems as challenges that must come to an end instantly, but economic problems cannot be solved instantly, it is has to be a gradual process, especially when the nation’s revenue is dwindling, as being currently experienced.

“Terrorism (insurgency), banditry, all these problems have internal political dimensions. These are the problems the citizens need to address. This is the background I want to give (in this discussion).”

But how feasible is the policy of ‘Nigeria First,’ as announced by Minister of Foreign Affairs Geoffrey Onyeama? Otto aligned himself with Professor Akinterinwa and Dr. Mou when he said: “When government makes a policy statement, it is not something that the people will start seeing the impact immediately. Let me make one point . . . one of the problems we have in Nigeria is that foreign policy matters are never on the front burner in the country’s political campaigns. We focus so much on internal issues, internal politics, forgetting that the two must be married, that is the problem America is having under President Donald Trump.

“Trump believes that, once business is moving well in the United States, it doesn’t matter what goes on outside the country. But it doesn’t work that way. In international relations, we must always look at both internal and external factors because they play complementary roles. I’m pointing this out because, in Nigeria, we don’t really place emphasis on foreign policy, or what the regime has in stock for us (in that regard). Rather, we think of primordial issues of our internal politics.

“I recall the policy of ‘Citizen Diplomacy,’ which the former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ojo Madueke, canvassed under Yar’Adua’s administration, was lauded because Nigerians were almost being humiliated in every country they visited. But to what extent did the policy achieve its objective? Foreign policy must have what we call the implementation machinery. It is not enough to make foreign policy; you must look at how that policy is being enforced. To what extent are we able to look at those aspects that affect our citizens abroad?

“However, what Onyeama said about ‘Nigeria First’ is a good statement, just like Trump talks about ‘America First.’ What it means, literally, is that Nigerians are uppermost in the mind of the government. There is what we call ‘concentric circle.’ You must look at your domestic issues to transcend regional issues and so forth. But to what extent will Onekama’s “Nigeria First” policy translate, how would the government be able to achieve it?”

Otto argues that, if the three goals of the Buhari administration are pursued to the letter and given domestic support, their impact would trickle down to the citizens. He cited the example of the fight against corruption, saying that government is enjoying international goodwill and making sure that it recovers looted funds.

“If those recovered funds are used to develop the economy, the benefits will trickle down to the citizens. That will be a plus for the government,” he said.

On measures to improve Nigeria foreign policy, Otto stressed that: “There is nothing like improving our foreign policy. The way our foreign policy is being articulated, those analysts who are critical of the government, as a scholar in international relations, I know that foreign policy is not just about how you go to the United Nations and deliver speeches. If you watch every summit of the UN, that platform provides the leaders an opportunity to tell the world what they are doing in their respective countries. That is foreign policy.

“ So, analysts who are saying they don’t understand the foreign policy thrust of the government, I have mentioned the foreign policy of the government by way of introduction.  I mentioned earlier the principles of foreign policy and what those principles are; principles of multilateral diplomacy, principles of legal equality, and principles of afrocentrism. These are principles that were enunciated by our founding fathers on October 7, 1960, when Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa was addressing the UN. He told them this is the mission of Nigeria.”