News

OKPE AND SAPELE RECEIVING LESS THAN THEY DESERVE, SAYS PROF IGHO NATUFE

Published

1 year ago

June 25, 2025

Ochuwa Ibrahim

OKPE AND SAPELE RECEIVING LESS THAN THEY DESERVE, SAYS PROF IGHO NATUFE

· TASKS TINUBU, OBOREVWORI, OTHERS ON OKPE IDENTITY, DEVELOPMENT

· RECALLS IBRU’S ROLE IN THE SYSTEMATIC EXCLUSION OF OKPE

· WARNS CRITICS

By: Our Reporter

A strong and enthusiastic request for the restoration of the independence of the Okpe Nation came Wednesday from the President General of Okpe Union Worldwide, Prof Igho Natufe.

‘’Students of Nigerian history are familiar with the British colonial policy of fusing diverse ethnic nationalities into one. Outside the contemporary Delta State, this British policy was more pronounced in the “Hausa-Fulani” phenomenon which most Nigerians, until recently, assumed to be one ethnic nationality. We are living witnesses to the awakened consciousness of the Hausas as they engage in an existential struggle to extricate themselves from the “Hausa-Fulani” appellation. It was this same British policy that birthed the false classification of Okpe as “a clan of Urhobo”.

He enjoined President Bola Tinubu and Delta State Governor, Chief Sheriff Oborevwori to pay attention to the demands of the good people of Okpe kingdom.

‘’At its infancy they referred to Urhobo as “Sobo”. Contemporary Okpe nationals were born and raised in this falsity especially as they relate externally. This classification has robed Okpe of its ethnic identity, as contributions by Okpe nationals are credited to the Urhobo and not to the Okpe nationality. This cataloguing illegally extinguished Okpe ethnicity and institutionalized the assimilation of the Okpe nationality by the Urhobo.

Natufe in a statement in Lagos on Wednesday recalled the British fusion of Okpe with the Urhobo in the colonial days.

‘’In the 1930s the Okpe was placed in “Western Urhobo” and the Isoko in “Eastern Urhobo.” By administering the Okpe under the Urhobo umbrella, the British set in motion a process that led to the gradual but a systematic erosion of Okpe ethnicity which was erroneously subsumed under the Urhobo. Over time, this grave error of British colonialism assumed a “truth” of its own as the outside world and several Okpe began to refer to the Okpe as “Urhobo.” This falsity was inherited by post-colonial Nigerian governments. A similar fate befell the Isoko of “Eastern Urhobo.” However, unlike the Okpe, their western counterpart, the Isokos were able to extricate themselves from the Urhobo appellation and restored their independence as a distinct ethnic nationality”.

He noted with satisfaction that inspite of the problems created by colonialism, the oldest registered ethnic organization of Delta State and in Nigeria; the Okpe Union recorded a lot of achievements in the colonial days.

“Notwithstanding the long years of interregnum, and the attempts by some powerful leaders to establish mini kingdoms, the Okpe people remained together as a Nation, thus giving significance to the slogan “Okpe Agbamua eni” (the unity of Okpe is an Elephant or Okpe Unity enables the lifting of an elephant). The establishment of the Okpe Union on May 16, 1930, in Lagos, galvanized the Okpe people into greater resolve. The Okpe Union, the oldest registered ethnic organization of Delta State, and in Nigeria, became the mouth piece of the Okpe Nation and a defender of Okpe Identity. It championed the fight for the restoration of the Okpe Monarchy and succeeded in doing so when the British colonial regime approved the coronation of the second Orodje of Okpe Kingdom, Esezi II on January 1, 1945. Though the monarchy was to rotate among the four ruling houses, it was however decided by the Ruling Houses that a prince from the Esezi Ruling house be crowned the Orodje, as a way of appeasing the gods for the curse placed on Okpe Kingdom by Esezi l”.

Natufe said that, during the Midwest and Bendel State regimes era, when the current Edo and Delta states were together as one state, the colonial blurring of Okpe ethnic identity receded tremendously as Okpe people became practically recognised as a people with a distinct language.

‘’This paved the way for the use of the Okpe Language for public newscast and language requests and magazine programmes in the then Bendel Broadcasting Service Radio and Television, separate from the Urhobo Language. This was continued in Delta State in the first years of the military regime. Unfortunately, when the first Civilian Government of Delta State headed by Governor Felix Ibru came on board, there was established a policy of officially recognizing five Ethnic Groups in Delta State which were, in alphabetical order, Anioma, Ijaw, Isoko, Itsekiri, and Urhobo. The Ikas, Ndokwas (Ukuanis) and the Enuanis were to express or parade themselves as Anioma people; the Okpe and Urhobo people were to express or parade themselves as Urhobo people while the Ijaw, Isoko and Itsekiri retained their identities that they already had in the defunct Bendel State’’.

According to Natufe, the James Ibori Government not only established the DESOPADEC Law of Delta State in 2007 and recognized Ndokwa as an ethnic nationality in the DESOPADEC Law but rendered the previous ethnic nationality policies obsolete.

‘’In fact, the Delta State Government followed up by issuing a letter of apology to the Ndokwa Nation for previously omitting its name from the list of recognized ethnic nationalities. Unfortunately, the Okpe people did not seize the opportunity to protest the omission of Okpe. By the time Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan came on board, the struggle concentrated on having a Commissioner for the Okpe Nation in the DESOPADEC Commission scaled through when the House of Assembly moved a motion to dissolve the Commission. Governor Uduaghan then reconstituted the DESOPADEC Board to include an Okpe Commissioner in the person of Chief Joseph Egigba. In 2015, the Ika people also succeeded in having the DESOPADEC Law amended to reflect Ika ethnic nationality in the DESOPADEC Law’’.

He called for the amendment of the DESOPADEC Law, recognition of Okpe ethnic nationality and additional slots for the Okpe Nation.

‘’One implication of the recognition of an ethnic nationality in the DESOPADEC Law is that the group becomes entitled to an Executive Director and a Sub-Budget. In terms of slots, projects and impact on the area, the difference cannot be overemphasised. Today, as Okpe which is bigger than several of the recognised ethnic nationalities in the DESOPADEC, and even has more quantum in petroluem and gas production is not recognised under the law’’.

Natufe recollected the keynote address by His Royal Majesty, Orhue l, Orodje of Okpe Kingdom, entitled: “Tradition and governance in Okpe Kingdom delivered on September 1, 2007 the 3rd annual convention of the Okpe Union of North America held at Marriott Hotel, College Park, Maryland, MD. USA.

“Okpe is a unique ethnic nationality. It has distinctive roots in ancient history, tradition, culture, customs and language.” He added: “Our people are rooted in migration from the Bini Kingdom. This historical experience is similar to most other ethnic nationalities of the Western Niger Delta. Of all these nationalities however, Okpe History, language, tradition, and culture are closer to those of Bini which form part of the Edo group of languages.”

He also remembered the contributions of Dr. (Prince) Isaac Sunday Mebitaghan, JP and Rev. Dr. Charles E, Osume on the origins of the Okpe people and the distinctiveness of the Okpe people.

‘In its study on the History of the Okpe People of Delta Central, Udogun Okpe stated emphatically that “Okpe is indubitably known to be a distinct and autonomous Kingdom, an ethnic entity from its beginning. The people and their language are distinct and are named after their progenitor, Okpe, whose four sons (princes Orhue, Orhorho, Evbreke, and Esezi – OIN) founded the present day Okpe Kingdom”.

The renowned political scientist emphasized the role of the Okpe Union in the restoration of Okpe independence as a distinct ethnic nationality.

‘’As the mouth piece of the Okpe Nation, Okpe Union has been consistently steadfast in its advocacy for the restoration of Okpe independence as a distinct ethnic nationality and not a sub-group or clan of the Urhobo or of any other ethnic nationality in the world. This position on the retrieval of Okpe independence was strongly restated by Okpe nationals during the 95th Anniversary Celebrations of the founding of the Okpe Union on May 16, 2025 in Lagos. For example, in his comments on the subject at the 95th Anniversary Celebrations, AVM Frank Ajobena (RTD), former Military Administrator of Abia State, pointedly reiterated the distinctiveness of Okpe ethnic nationality. While he rightfully recognized the Urhobos as our neighbours, he however reminded them that “the identity of a people is fundamental to their emancipation’’.

Natufe slammed critics for embarking on a futile crusade.

‘’The Okpe language is very different from the Urhobo, just as the Urhobo is different from the Ukwuani, and the Itsekiri is different from the Isoko; even though they may all trace their respective origins to Benin Kingdom. However, due to their proximity and century-old relationships, it is normal to find commonalities between all these diverse ethnic nationalities. However, it must be stressed that, the cosmological bond that binds an Okpe to a fellow Okpe is not the same that binds the Urhobo people. For example, when an Okpe addresses another Okpe as “omizu mẹ,” the salutation carries a more profound sociological and historical significance than the Urhobo’s “omoni.” By addressing an Okpe as “omizu mẹ,” the speaker is evoking a deep spiritual bond with his/her fellow Okpe citizen that underlines their common ancestry as the children of Prince Okpe. This is absent in the Urhobo, for example. Therefore, we challenge Mr. Gbemre and his cohorts to provide historical evidences to their claim that “Okpe is Urhobo” and that we share the same ancestry and language’’.

He accused one Mr. Zik Gbemre and his cohorts of working against the interest of the Okpe Nation.

‘’This is so banal that it is shameful to even consider it as a “contribution”. But, since that is the best he can offer we will include it in our response. For him and his cohorts, the demand for the recognition of Okpe as a distinct ethnic nationality is a “reckless insult” by “some lunatic fringes within Okpe to smear the larger Urhobo nation”. This is reminiscent of the dark days of colonialism and apartheid in the colonies and South Africa, as European colonialists and the white racist regime of South Africa reacted to the demand for independence by Africans. Perhaps the next action Mr. Gbemre and his cohorts will contemplate is to employ guns and dogs to truncate Okpe’s agitation for independence’’.

He challenged Okpe critics to provide historical evidences to their claim that “Okpe is Urhobo”

‘’They should educate us on the establishment of the “Western Urhobo Division”. Was it a division established through a bilateral agreement between the Okpe and the Urhobo? Or was it a division imposed by the British Colonial Government? It is important to point out one remarkable move by the Okpe people before the Independence of Nigeria. Between 1953 and 1954, the Okpe Union (supported by HRM Esezi II, the Orodje of Okpe Kingdom) wrote to the Western Regional Government in Ibadan that the Okpe Area of Western Urhobo Division should be joined with Sapele Municipality to form an Okpe Division. Though the application did not scale through because of the consideration of the power balance of the Delta Province in the estimation of the then Premier of the Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the move was a strong indication of the resolve of the Okpe people that they have always been a distinct ethnic nationality.

He denounced critics for engaging in misinformation.

‘’It is interesting that one Mr. Gbemre is obsessed with me bearing an Itsekiri name. In case he and his cohorts are unaware, my maternal grandfather was an Itsekiri (from Obotagharenda) while my maternal grandmother was an Urhobo (from Okpara Inland). My paternal grandparents were both Okpe (from Sapele and Amuokpe, respectively). My paternal grandfather had four wives: three Okpes and one Urhobo (from Orogun). For his information, three of the four children (my uncles and an aunt) from the Urhobo wife were given Itsekiri names, including Uncle Dr. Victor Amoma Natufe, the current Most Senior Okakuro of the Okpe Kingdom. There are hundreds of thousands of Okpe and Urhobo that bear Itsekiri names, irrespective of whether they have blood relationships or not with the Itsekiri. We have Okpe families that bear Itsekiri names, including Okakuro Onoriode Temiagin, whose surname was in fact changed from Ofotokun. The name ‘OREROKPE’ which is the ancestral headquarters of Okpe Kingdom/Clan is Urhobo language/name meaning the Town of Okpe”. He obviously does not know that Igho, for example, belongs to the Edoid group of languages, including the Bini, Esan, Isoko, Okpe, and Urhobo ethnic nationalities, respectively. Similarly, Orerokpe is an Okpe name or expression just as there is “OREDO” in Benin’’.

OKPE AND SAPELE RECEIVING LESS THAN THEY DESERVE, SAYS PROF IGHO NATUFE

Related Topics:OKPE AND SAPELE RECEIVING LESS THAN THEY DESERVE SAYS PROF IGHO NATUFE

Up Next

NAJUWA CONDEMNS BENUE KILLINGS, URGES UNITY AGAINST VIOLENCE, AND REJECTS CONTINUED UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE JUKUN PEOPLE

Don't Miss

Cult reprisal attack in Rivers claims policeman’s life, triggers arrests

Ochuwa Ibrahim

Click to comment

International

Nigeria, Japan Move to Set Up Industrial Hub to Unlock Investment

Published

1 hour ago

October 28, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

Nigeria, Japan Move to Set Up Industrial Hub to Unlock Investment

…Abuja seeks Japanese capital, technology transfer as Tokyo promises faster visa processing

By: Michael Mike

Nigeria is seeking to establish a joint industrial and investment hub with Japan to attract foreign capital, accelerate technology transfer and position local businesses to tap into Japanese supply chains and the wider African market.

The proposal, put forward by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, signals Nigeria’s push to turn 66 years of diplomatic relations with Japan into a stronger economic partnership driven by investment, industrialisation and job creation.

Odumegwu-Ojukwu made the proposal during a bilateral meeting with Japan’s Ambassador to Nigeria, Suzuki Hideo, urging Tokyo to work with Nigeria on a practical roadmap for the proposed Nigeria–Japan Industrial and Investment Hub.

The initiative is expected to facilitate joint ventures, connect investors with credible Nigerian businesses, promote skills development and encourage Japanese companies to establish stronger industrial links with Africa’s largest economy.

The minister stressed that existing bilateral agreements must translate into concrete investment commitments and measurable development outcomes, rather than remain diplomatic declarations.

“The outcomes of the Forum must be translated into concrete programmes, investment commitments and measurable development outcomes,” she said.

She urged both countries to implement the agreements reached at the 10th Nigeria–Japan Special Partnership Forum, held in Abuja on August 27, through practical programmes and regular consultations between their foreign ministries.

To strengthen private-sector participation, Odumegwu-Ojukwu called for more partnerships between Nigerian and Japanese companies through joint ventures, local content development, skills transfer and the integration of Nigerian businesses into Japanese supply chains.

She also sought greater engagement by the Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) to link Japanese investors with Nigerian enterprises and public-sector partners.

Beyond manufacturing and trade, Nigeria is seeking Japanese investment in solid minerals, gas development, cleaner energy technologies and industrial decarbonisation, with the minister highlighting the strategic importance of resilient energy and critical-mineral supply chains.

The proposed investment push comes alongside Japan’s development cooperation in infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, education and technical training through the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).

Odumegwu-Ojukwu welcomed a $10 million JICA-supported initiative to strengthen Nigeria’s startup ecosystem through catalytic capital and institutional development, in partnership with the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority.

She also called for sustained Japanese support for peacebuilding, humanitarian assistance and stabilisation in Nigeria and West Africa, reaffirming Nigeria’s commitment to regional stability through the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States.

On mobility and business exchanges, the minister urged continued dialogue to resolve visa-related challenges affecting businesspeople, students, researchers, government officials and tourists.

Responding, Suzuki said Japan was desirous of deepening cooperation with Nigeria, which he described as a strategic African giant.

He also assured that visa-related issues would be handled expeditiously, an undertaking that could help facilitate business and people-to-people exchanges between the two countries.

Odumegwu-Ojukwu said the existing cordial relations between Nigeria and Japan offered an opportunity to build a more dynamic partnership anchored on investment, industrialisation, technology transfer and shared prosperity.

The renewed engagement comes as both countries seek to move beyond decades of diplomatic relations towards stronger commercial ties, with the proposed industrial hub emerging as a potential platform for converting bilateral goodwill into investments and economic opportunities.

Nigeria, Japan Move to Set Up Industrial Hub to Unlock Investment

News

NSCDC Begins Asset Tagging to Curb Mismanagement of Public Property

Published

1 hour ago

October 28, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

NSCDC Begins Asset Tagging to Curb Mismanagement of Public Property

By: Michael Mike

The Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) has launched an asset coding and tagging exercise aimed at strengthening accountability, tracking institutional property and preventing the misuse of public resources.

The Commandant-General of the Corps, Prof. Ahmed Audi, said the initiative would improve transparency, operational efficiency and the utilisation of government assets across the organisation.

Audi gave the charge on Tuesday during the official flag-off of the exercise at the NSCDC National Headquarters in Abuja, urging personnel to demonstrate discipline and accountability in the management of institutional property.

He stressed that the assets were public property entrusted to the Corps and must be protected against misuse, neglect and mismanagement.

The Commandant-General also called on top management officers to cooperate fully with the exercise, which is expected to strengthen asset tracking and improve records of the Corps’ property.

Earlier, the Head of the Tracking Assets Unit, CSC Akinbinu Festus, described the exercise as a demonstration of the Corps’ renewed commitment to accountability and responsible asset management.

In his vote of thanks, ACG Faruk Musa Boyi commended Audi for initiating the exercise, stressing the importance of maintaining accurate asset records.

The event was attended by Deputy Commandants-General and other senior management officers, reflecting the Corps’ commitment to strengthening institutional accountability and improving resource management.

NSCDC Begins Asset Tagging to Curb Mismanagement of Public Property

News

MIKTA Nations Push Climate Finance Reforms as Nigeria Faces $337bn Funding Gap

Published

1 hour ago

October 28, 2026

Ochuwa Ibrahim

MIKTA Nations Push Climate Finance Reforms as Nigeria Faces $337bn Funding Gap

By: Michael Mike

Nigeria will require an estimated $337 billion between 2026 and 2035 to implement its climate commitments, highlighting the enormous financing challenge confronting the country as international partners intensify calls for a more accessible and effective global climate finance system.

The funding requirement came into focus at a climate finance engagement in Abuja, where representatives of five countries under the MIKTA partnership—Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Türkiye and Australia—joined Nigeria’s National Council on Climate Change (NCCC) in advocating practical solutions to the gap between climate ambitions and the resources available to implement them.

The discussions centred on improving access to climate finance, mobilising private investment, expanding technology transfer, strengthening sustainable finance mechanisms and ensuring that international commitments translate into projects capable of delivering measurable results.

With countries preparing for the 31st United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP31, the speakers argued that the effectiveness of global climate action would depend not only on the amount of money pledged but also on whether vulnerable countries could access the funds without excessive bureaucratic, financial and institutional barriers.

Nigeria’s position was presented by Jummai Vandu, who represented the Director-General of the NCCC, Tenioye Majekodunmi. She highlighted the country’s substantial financing needs under its Nationally Determined Contribution 3.0 (NDC 3.0), which sets out its climate commitments for the coming years.

The $337 billion requirement underscores the scale of investment needed to advance mitigation and adaptation, strengthen resilience and support Nigeria’s transition towards a lower-carbon economy.

For Nigeria, the challenge extends beyond securing commitments from international partners to developing investment-ready projects, improving coordination among institutions and ensuring that available resources reach the sectors and communities that need them most.

The discussions also pointed to the importance of aligning climate action with national development priorities, including energy access, economic diversification, job creation and social inclusion.

Türkiye’s Ambassador to Nigeria, Mehmet Poroy, emphasised the need to close the gap between climate commitments and projects capable of attracting financing.

His intervention focused on the proposed Climate Implementation Bridge, an approach intended to help countries translate their climate plans into bankable projects and connect those projects with potential sources of funding.

The proposal reflects a persistent challenge in developing countries, where ambitious climate strategies often struggle to progress because of inadequate project preparation, limited technical capacity and difficulties attracting private capital.

The approach places emphasis on moving beyond declarations of intent towards practical implementation in areas such as renewable energy, climate-resilient agriculture, green industrialisation, food security and the circular economy.

For Nigeria and other developing economies, this would require stronger collaboration between governments, development institutions, investors and technical partners to identify viable projects, prepare them to meet financing requirements and improve the prospects of implementation.

Poroy’s intervention reinforced the broader message of the meeting: climate finance must be connected to a credible pipeline of projects if it is to produce tangible economic and environmental benefits.

Australia’s High Commissioner to Nigeria, Leilani Bin-Juda, called for reforms to make climate finance more accessible, particularly for developing countries and communities most exposed to the effects of climate change.

She highlighted an action plan on access to climate finance for small island developing states and least developed countries, a Pacific-led initiative developed through consultations involving vulnerable countries, development banks and multilateral climate funds.

The plan, launched at a pre-COP meeting in Fiji on October 8, seeks to address barriers that prevent countries from obtaining climate funding, including complicated applications, fragmented financing arrangements, demanding reporting requirements and lengthy approval processes.

Debt pressures, limited fiscal space and high borrowing costs further complicate access, making it difficult for countries already facing significant climate risks to finance adaptation and resilience measures.

Bin-Juda said the initiative had a global ambition and called for wider support beyond the Pacific, including from Nigeria and other African countries.

She stressed that the priority should be to ensure that climate finance responds more effectively to countries’ needs, with simpler application and disbursement processes, stronger national capacity to develop investment-ready projects and greater mobilisation of private capital alongside public and grant financing.

The plan also provides for annual high-level forums to assess progress and share lessons between 2027 and 2030.

For Australia, success would ultimately be measured by whether vulnerable countries could obtain the resources they need when they need them and convert those resources into stronger, more resilient communities.

Indonesia’s Ambassador to Nigeria, Bambang Suharto, highlighted the importance of sustainable financing mechanisms and international cooperation in supporting climate action.

His intervention drew attention to instruments such as green sukuk, sustainable finance taxonomies and other mechanisms capable of directing investment towards environmentally beneficial projects.

Green sukuk can help mobilise funds for eligible projects while broadening the pool of investors participating in climate-related financing. Sustainable finance taxonomies, meanwhile, provide criteria for identifying economic activities that qualify as environmentally sustainable, helping investors assess projects and allocate capital.

Indonesia’s experience also illustrates the importance of aligning climate finance with national development priorities and long-term emissions goals. The country has set a net-zero emissions target for 2060 or earlier.

The broader challenge, as reflected in the discussions, is to ensure that innovative financial instruments are supported by credible standards, transparent reporting and projects that can demonstrate measurable environmental and economic benefits.

International cooperation and the exchange of experience would be essential in helping developing countries adapt these instruments to their own financial systems and investment needs.

South Korea’s representative, Jeong Yo-an, emphasised the importance of technology, knowledge-sharing and cooperation in translating climate commitments into practical outcomes.

The intervention highlighted the value of partnerships that enable countries to share technical expertise, strengthen institutional capacity and deploy solutions suited to their development circumstances.

Technology transfer is particularly important for countries seeking to expand clean energy, improve industrial efficiency and strengthen resilience without undermining economic growth.

For Nigeria, cooperation in these areas could help address technical and institutional gaps that often prevent climate strategies from progressing from policy documents to implementation.

The discussion also reinforced the need for partnerships that combine financing with technical support, ensuring that countries have both the resources and the capacity to execute climate projects effectively.

Mexico’s Chargé d’Affaires, José Manuel Briseño Flores, highlighted the role of sustainable finance frameworks in directing investment towards climate action and other development priorities.

His intervention focused on mechanisms including sustainable finance taxonomies and green, social and sustainability bonds, which can help channel capital into projects with defined environmental or social objectives.

Such instruments can provide governments and businesses with additional avenues for raising funds for renewable energy, climate resilience and other sustainable development initiatives.

However, their effectiveness depends on clear standards, transparency and credible systems for demonstrating how funds are used and what results they achieve.

Developing bankable projects and establishing reliable frameworks for sustainable investment would therefore be crucial to attracting more capital, particularly from private investors.

The Mexican position complemented the wider call for financing systems that do more than announce funding commitments and instead provide a clear pathway from investment decisions to measurable outcomes.

Taken together, the interventions pointed to a common concern: the growing distance between the scale of climate action required and the ability of vulnerable and developing countries to finance it.

The global climate finance debate has increasingly focused on mobilising larger sums, but the Abuja discussions highlighted the equally important questions of accessibility, affordability, project preparation and accountability.

For Nigeria, the $337 billion estimated requirement under NDC 3.0 makes these issues particularly urgent.

Securing financing would need to go hand in hand with stronger institutions, credible project pipelines, improved coordination and investment frameworks capable of attracting both domestic and international capital.

The country would also need to ensure that climate investments support its wider development objectives, including improved energy access, economic opportunities and protection for communities vulnerable to climate impacts.

The MIKTA countries’ interventions offered different approaches to the same challenge: Türkiye’s emphasis on connecting commitments with bankable projects; Australia’s push for simpler access to climate finance; Indonesia’s focus on innovative financial instruments; South Korea’s advocacy of technology and knowledge-sharing; and Mexico’s support for sustainable investment frameworks.

Nigeria’s NCCC, meanwhile, underscored the scale of the domestic financing challenge and the importance of mobilising resources to implement the country’s climate commitments.

As preparations for COP31 gather momentum, the central question remains whether international cooperation can deliver a financing system that developing countries can access in practice, rather than one whose promises remain difficult to convert into action.

For Nigeria, the stakes extend beyond meeting international climate targets. They include the country’s ability to finance a more resilient economy, attract green investment and ensure that climate action delivers practical benefits for its people.

MIKTA Nations Push Climate Finance Reforms as Nigeria Faces $337bn Funding Gap