Connect with us

News

FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD

Published

on

FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD

By: Michael
Mike

Nigeria’s foreign policy to promote peace and prosperity is a constitutional obligation as much as it is a considered and sensible manifesto pledge, writes Hon Yusuf Tuggar, Minister of Foreign Affairs.

I was born in a civil war and was not able to vote for my leader until I was in my 30s. Nigeria is now a country guided by the rule of law and a constitution that clearly defines our system of government. This includes our foreign policy objectives, and rightly so, because in an interconnected world, we define our sovereignty in the context of certain, key principles: our right to self-determination; our right to defend our autonomy and secure our borders; and responsibility to respect our obligations under international law.

As foreign minister, I think these provisions are not just reasonable but vital – both for our own democracy, domestic peace and prosperity but also for a more just and stable international order. But the point is this: it is the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, not the manifesto of a political party or predilections of a particular politician, that lays out these provisions. In a democracy, we have the privilege of healthy debate about our values, policies and performance. But if we are to live up to the responsibilities that come with democracy, that debate should be informed, fair and reasonable.

I respect the Constitution and its vision for Nigeria’s place in the international community, as do many of us. It has been an honour and a privilege to protect and promote those constitutional principles. They are the best guarantees for legitimacy, and the authority all governments need if they are to deliver. It is complex and time consuming. To our cost, we have learnt that there are no short cuts. Some Nigerians find fault in our Constitution, while others seek to amend it. There is always room for serious debate in a healthy democracy. But the fact remains it is the very document that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and every public official has sworn to uphold since 1999.

Nigeria’s Constitution declares that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government, through this Constitution, derives all its powers and authority. The same Chapter of the Constitution goes on to state Nigeria’s five foreign policy objectives: promotion and protection of the national interest, African integration and support for African unity, promotion of international cooperation for peace and mutual respect, respect of international law and treaty obligations and promotion of a just world economic order. Those who suggest Nigeria does not have a foreign policy or those who agitate for a shift away from an Afro-centric foreign policy are wrong; either they are ill-informed, or deliberately disingenuous.

The irony of it all is that Nigerians are able to speak in support of our military-ruled neighbours, governed without constitutions, precisely because Chapter Four of our own constitution guarantees them these rights and freedoms. This is not the same for the citizens ruled by the very regimes for which they seek to cheerlead of those countries governed without constitutions. Nigerians who are older than 30 know this to be true because we have been there, done that. Somehow in the passage of time, some forget that the military regime here that despatched troops to restore democracy in Sierra Leone and Liberia in the 1990s had first – and by force – taken that same democracy and rule of law away from us – just as military regimes continue to do the world over.

The Constitution also makes clear why any responsible Nigerian government should be concerned when neighbours are governed without a constitution or codified rules. It goes without saying that the sovereignty of our neighbours is their business. They can grant powers to whatever governing structures they deem fit and should expect their autonomy to remain safeguarded. But when our Interdependence Sovereignty overlaps, we equally have a right to exercise control over our borders in those cases where neighbours face insurgencies that significantly comprise territorial integrity and state authority.

International Legal Sovereignty also becomes an issue when we consider that respect for international law and treaty obligations is one of our irreducible foreign policy objectives. This is not the Tinubu administration’s foreign policy; it is a constitutional provision that every Nigerian President and government official swears to uphold. Nigeria is a member of ECOWAS, which is founded on treaties and protocols to which our foreign policy objectives commit us. All 15 member countries are signatory to the treaties and protocols, which is why it was no surprise that President Tinubu, as one who swore to uphold the Constitution, abided by it when ECOWAS leaders collectively objected to Unconstitutional Changes of Government.

In reality, the contemporary nation-state system is highly competitive and Nigeria exists in a self-help world. Our Constitution and international laws are meant to serve as guard rails in navigating the system. And by virtue of our size, we have the additional responsibility of being the regional power. Regardless of how some may try to diminish our standing, it is the way other countries perceive us. Our Constitution further reifies this leadership role right from the preamble- dedicating ourselves to promoting inter-African solidarity, to the foreign policy objectives- promotion of African integration and support for African unity and elimination of discrimination in all its manifestations.

The Tinubu administration comes at a time when an interlocking suite of occurrences have made our neighbourhood less secure; implosion of Libya, failure of the EU Sahel Strategy, terrorism and criminal gangs, effects of climate change and population explosion. Nigeria did not create these challenges and was equally contending with its own domestic issue as these challenges escalated. Nigeria was not part of Operation Barkhane or the G5 in the Sahel, which were intended as efforts to fight terrorism and irregular migration but instead strengthened some irridentist Azawad/Tuareg groups that controlled border areas. This created a cauldron of disharmony between them and their national militaries, trained for a lifetime to keep their countries intact.

Nor was Nigeria part of the Partnership Framework with Third countries that conditioned aid and trade deals for Sahelian migration transit states in exchange for reducing the flow of migrants, with penalties for those who do not comply. In the case of Niger, a moment of truth was the passing of Law 2015-36 in May 2015 when its government, in consultation with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and technical and financial support from the European Union and its member states, criminalized ancillary activities of the migration economy, such as providing transportation and accommodation to foreign nationals anywhere north of Agadez, in direct contravention of ECOWAS Protocol on the free movement of people. They were persuaded to use a blunt hammer to crack a delicate nut. There is a highly politicised migration crisis in parts of Europe, that together we can and should resolve. But it was reckless to seek to solve one problem by creating another.

There is a reason why we have free movement in West Africa; seasonal migration- referred to in Hausa as ‘Ci Rani’. Seasonal migration in the semi-arid Sahel can be a matter of life and death, which is why we have always had turbaned Tuaregs going as far as Lagos and Port Harcourt to work as Maigadis (security) during the dry months, only to return back north during the rainy season. The weaponisation of sub-Saharan migration in Europe as a political tool led to the securitisation of the Sahel region, further exacerbating the security situation by forcing many of those affected to turn to criminal activities and terrorism. European migration figures show majority of migrants are from Syria, Afghanistan and Central Asia, not sub-Saharan Africa.

Yes, we need to work with our Sahelian neighbours to fight terrorism, by maintaining a right of pursuit into each others territories. But it would be myopic to think of this in absolutist terms, because we can accede to all conditionalities laid by them, it would still not be enough to tackle the challenges without a lasting solution to the bifurcated Libyan State as a source of weapons, training and fighters, as well as the shadowy involvement of a range of other state and non-state actors.

To achieve a lasting peace in Libya and the Sahel, Nigeria needs to deal with all the countries in the neighbourhood as well as all the major powers. For this reason, it does not make sense to simply deduce that Nigeria has to distance itself from France because that is the prevailing trend in its former colonies. The fulcrum of the Tinubu administration’s foreign policy is Strategic Autonomy, providing us with the clarity to engage with any and all nations based on our national interests and not those of others. As a nation, Nigeria is adult enough and sophisticated enough to deal with countries without being unduly influenced, because that has been part of our historical and civic tradition. You cannot cure an illness by picking which symptoms to consider and which to ignore.

Nigeria and ECOWAS will continue diplomatic efforts towards Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso. At a minimum, we have shared interest in peaceful co-existence. President Tinubu has sent a number of high-level delegations that included a former Head of State, traditional rulers and religious scholars. President Tinubu pushed for the unconditional removal of ECOWAS sanctions imposed on Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso. What he has consistently asked of the countries in question is for them to come up with a timetable for the restoration of constitutional rule and, in the case of Niger, the release of ousted President Bazoum.

Their response was to declare their intention to leave ECOWAS. With the one-year notice period coming to an end in January 2025, President Tinubu further pushed for ECOWAS to extend the grace period for another six months whilst intensifying diplomatic efforts. The response to this initiative last month was evidence-free allegations that Nigeria was harbouring foreign soldiers and as sponsoring state terrorism. Whenever President Tinubu and other democratic leaders offer stoic statesmanship and an opportunity to work together towards our common interests, it is met by confected controversy designed to divert and distract from a failure to meet the basic responsibilities of public administration. I know why coup leaders might seek to do that: it’s harder to understand the motives of apologists closer to home.

On my part, since assuming the office of Minister of Foreign Affairs on 21st August 2023, I have engaged diplomatically without pause, proposing personal visits and inviting senior government officials and representatives. Response has been akin to a diplomatic cold shoulder. We constituted a ministerial advisory committee that visited Niger and Mali and facilitated the visit of the Nigerian CDS to meet with his counterpart in Niamey. I regret that a proposed return visit was suspended by Niger after a date had been set. But let there be no doubt: we will continue to pursue diplomatic efforts assiduously, with a Ministry of Foreign Affairs that has existed for 67 years.

Nigeria’s principle of strategic autonomy is one that abhors the presence of foreign forces and private military companies in our region, whether from east or west. Nigeria presently has troops on peace keeping operations in Guinea Bissau and Gambia, with Sierra Leone on the way, where it is also supporting the setting up of a logistics base in Lungi. Nigeria is also leading the actualisation of the ECOWAS standby force, all in an effort to fight terrorism and instability within our region under the rule of law. We work closely with our partners on sharing of intelligence in order to guarantee the same rights and freedoms are enjoyed by all the people of the region.

As several of my colleagues in the region remind me, we are the hegemon, whether we admit it or not. And global politics works almost like physics, with polarity, ordering principles, distribution of power, balancing, etc. Nigeria has never had expansionist tendencies, never been threatening towards our neighbours and always chosen the path of peace and conciliation. This in part may have to do with the makeup of our polity and social fabric. Being such a huge country, we are used to the virtues of principled compromise. It is not by accident that we are the only country on the continent with six former leaders living in peace and harmony within our borders. Diversity, not division, is our strength. This is as true for Nigeria as it is for the smallest of countries – and collectively for all of our region.

FOREIGN POLICY AND THE PATH TO PEACE IN A DANGEROUS NEIGHBOURHOOD

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

How propaganda and exaggerated genocide narratives triggered punitive international actions against Nigeria

Published

on

How propaganda and exaggerated genocide narratives triggered punitive international actions against Nigeria

By: Zagazola Makama

Recent United States visa restrictions and mass deportation measures affecting Nigerian nationals have reopened debate on how sustained propaganda, misinformation and alarmist narratives about insecurity in Nigeria shaped international perceptions and policy responses against the country.

While Nigeria continues to face real security challenges including terrorism by ISWAP, Boko Haram, AlQaeda, banditry, farmer–herder clashes and transnational jihadist infiltration, the framing of these conflicts as an organised, state-backed “Christian genocide” has increasingly been questioned by Nigerians.

Yet, for several years, a powerful campaign driven largely by Nigerian activists, politicians and diaspora-based pressure groups portrayed Nigeria as the world’s epicentre of religious extermination, with claims that were grossly exaggerated, unverifiable or outright false.

The agitations grew domestic grievance to international propaganda. Between 2021 and 2024, a wave of advocacy emerged accusing the Nigerian state of deliberately sponsoring or protecting jihadists allegedly engaged in the daily slaughter of Christians. Some campaigners claimed that 1,500 Christians were being killed every day, a figure that would translate to more than 540,000 deaths annually, a number exceeding fatalities recorded in most active war zones globally.

One widely circulated narrative claimed that between 2010 and October 2025, 185,000 people were killed on account of their faith, including 125,000 Christians and 60,000 Muslims, allegedly based on reports from Intersociety, one of the NGO created to push the false claims.” The same narrative alleged that 19,100 churches had been burned and 1,100 Christian communities completely seized and occupied by jihadists supposedly backed or shielded by the Nigerian government.

However, independent verification of these figures consistently failed. No global conflict-monitoring organization, including ACLED, UN agencies, or major international human rights bodies as well as official bodies like Police, DSS, and the NHRC, corroborated such numbers. Nigeria’s total population stands at approximately 240 million, making such casualty claims statistically implausible without triggering global humanitarian emergency responses on the scale of Gaza, Syria or Ukraine.

Zagazola Makama report that while religiously motivated attacks occur, Nigeria’s violence landscape is far more complex, driven by criminal banditry, resource conflict, insurgency, arms proliferation, climate stress and weak border control, affecting Muslims, Christians, Pagan, traditionalist and adherents of other faiths alike.

Despite the lack of empirical grounding, these activities keep weaponizing faith to internationalise pressure. The genocide narrative gained traction in U.S. political circles, evangelical advocacy groups and sections of Western media. Some Nigerian politicians amplified these claims at international forums, urging sanctions, arms embargoes and even military intervention against their own country.

The expectation among agitators was that Trump’s administration would deploy American forces or impose targeted sanctions against Nigerian officials and groups like Miyetti Allah, Boko Haram, Bandit and those that once push for Shariah laws. Instead, the policy response took a different and far more consequential direction. Rather than physical military intervention, Washington opted for strategic intervention with the armed forces of Nigeria through technical support while in their country they opted for tougher penalties like border control, immigration enforcement and visa restrictions, citing insecurity, terrorist activity, document integrity issues and vetting challenges.

Nigeria was subsequently placed under partial U.S. travel restrictions, with the U.S. government explicitly referencing the activities of Boko Haram and ISWAP, and difficulties in screening travellers from affected regions.

The unintended security backlash
Ironically, following persistent framing of Nigeria’s violence as a religious war produced outcomes opposite to what campaigners claimed to seek. Rather than protecting Christians, the rhetoric emboldened extremist groups to carry even more deadlier attacks.

Terrorist organisations, including ISWAP, JAS and al-Qaeda-linked JNIM elements now infiltrating North-Central Nigeria, capitalised on global narratives portraying Nigeria as a battlefield of faith. By attacking churches, clergy and Christian communities, these groups sought to validate the propaganda, provoke sectarian retaliation and trigger a broader religious conflict. This strategy mirrors jihadist doctrine across the Sahel: manufacture sectarian violence, polarise society, delegitimise the state and attract recruits.

Security intelligence from Kwara and Niger States, for instance, shows JNIM’s Katiba Macina exploiting communal tensions along the Benin–Nigeria corridor, recruiting Fulani youths while framing attacks as resistance against “tyranny” language deliberately aimed at feeding international narratives of persecution.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has since justified its tougher posture using data-driven assessments: visa overstay rates, terrorism risks, weak civil documentation systems and law-enforcement information gaps.
For Nigeria, these translated into: Partial visa suspensions for B, F, M and J categories, increased scrutiny of Nigerian travellers, inclusion in broader immigration enforcement actions, Indirect reputational damage affecting trade, education and diplomacy

Meanwhile, The Department Homeland Security announced record deportations and self-removals, over 2.5 million exits since January 2025, a development that disproportionately affects nationals of countries portrayed as high-risk, Nigeria included. Crucially, those most affected are ordinary Nigerians students, professionals, families and entrepreneurs, not terrorists, bandit leaders or militia commanders.

The Fulani bandit in the forest has no interest in a U.S. visa. It is the Nigerian student, pastor, doctor and trader who bears the cost.

Notably, as sanctions and restrictions took effect, the loud genocide rhetoric largely faded from public discourse. The activists who once dominated international media cycles have grown quieter, perhaps confronted by the reality that the consequences fell on Nigeria as a whole, not on imagined perpetrators. This pattern point to a broader lesson in strategic communication: when a nation’s internal crises are exaggerated into existential falsehoods, external actors respond not with rescue but with containment.

A cautionary lesson for national discourse is that; Nigeria’s security challenges are real and demand sustained reform, diplomatic support, and international cooperation. But weaponising religion, spreading unverifiable casualty figures and lobbying for foreign punitive action against one’s own country undermines national security rather than strengthening it. More dangerously, it feeds extremist propaganda, deepens communal mistrust and invites external decisions based on distorted perceptions.

When internal challenges are projected internationally without context or factual balance, foreign governments respond not with solidarity but with restrictions, sanctions and containment. In this environment, propaganda even when framed as advocacy, erodes diplomatic goodwill and inflicts long-term harm on citizens whose lives and opportunities are shaped by external policy decisions.

False alarms and absolutist narratives fracture social trust, embolden extremists and inflame the very fault lines terrorists seek to exploit. Ultimately, propaganda however emotionally persuasive does not protect communities; it weakens national resilience and leaves society more vulnerable to the forces it hopes to defeat.

Zagazola Makama is a Counter Insurgency Expert and Security Analyst in the Lake Chad region

How propaganda and exaggerated genocide narratives triggered punitive international actions against Nigeria

Continue Reading

News

Gunmen kill soldier, abduct 13 passengers on Okene–Auchi highway

Published

on

Gunmen kill soldier, abduct 13 passengers on Okene–Auchi highway

By: Zagazola Makama

Suspected kidnappers disguised in military uniforms have killed a serving soldier and abducted 13 passengers during coordinated attacks on two commercial vehicles along the Okene–Auchi Federal Highway.

Zagazola Makama report that the incident occurred at about 5:35 p.m. on Dec. 16 when unknown gunmen intercepted a green Toyota Sienna, conveying nine passengers from Abuja to Delta State.

The source said six passengers were abducted from the vehicle, while three others were rescued.

According to the source, the attackers also stopped a white Toyota Hiace bus, conveying 11 passengers from Delta State to Abuja, during the same operation.

“Seven passengers were abducted from the Hiace bus, while four were rescued,” the source said.

Tragically, the source said a serving Non-Commissioned Officer of the Nigerian Army, who was among the passengers and had identified himself as a soldier, was shot by the attackers.

“He sustained gunshot injuries to his legs and thighs and was later confirmed dead,” the source added.

Both vehicles were recovered and towed to a police station for safe keeping, while five empty shells of 7.62mm ammunition suspected to be from an AK-47 rifle were recovered at the scene as exhibits.

The corpse of the deceased soldier was deposited at the Okengwe General Hospital mortuary for autopsy, while statements were obtained from the rescued victims to aid investigation.

It was gathered that troops have launched joint rescue operations, including bush combing and intensive surveillance along the highway, with a view to rescuing the abducted passengers and arresting the perpetrators.

The authorities assured motorists that measures were being intensified to secure the Okene–Auchi corridor and prevent further attacks.

Gunmen kill soldier, abduct 13 passengers on Okene–Auchi highway

Continue Reading

News

Bandits kill one, abduct several in Zamfara

Published

on

Bandits kill one, abduct several in Zamfara

By: Zagazola Makama

Armed bandits have killed a young man and abducted several others during an attack on a store area in Bungudu Local Government Area of Zamfara State.

Zagazola report that the incident occurred at about 12:30 a.m. on Dec. 16 when gunmen, carrying AK-47 rifles and other sophisticated weapons, launched a sporadic shooting spree in Karakkai district.

The source said one Lukman Rabe, aged 21, was shot dead during the attack, while an unspecified number of people were abducted and taken to an unknown location.

Army troops in collaboration with joint Police, and local hunters, were immediately mobilised to the scene to secure the area.

Sources said that efforts are ongoing to rescue the abducted victims and apprehend the fleeing suspects, while residents have been urged to remain vigilant and report any suspicious activity to security agencie
End

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights