A report, last week, that Federal Government is considering a shift in its foreign policy focus is instructive. Emphasis, henceforth, may be on extracting commensurate economic benefits from the nation�s foreign policy undertakings, instead of sentiments, which is a refreshing relief from the FG�s past Father Christmas posture. The new focus, christened �Concentric Beneficial Foreign Policy,� was announced by the Foreign Affairs Minister, Chief Olu Adeniji. The FG, however, still retained the four-decade-old policy of making Africa the centerpiece of Nigeria�s foreign policy in the new diplomatic initiative.
Since the nation�s independence in 1960, Nigeria�s foreign policy has scarcely been driven by considerations for economic gains. Africa�s independence and unity, non-alignment and non-interference in the internal affairs of other nations, peaceful resolution of disputes, regional economic cooperation and integration and maintenance of Nigeria�s sovereign integrity have been the main thrust.
The country championed the creation of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in 1975, to synchronize trade and investment among the 16 member states. Nigeria was named among the frontline states in the liberation struggle in Southern Africa because of its massive, selfless financial and material commitment to the dismantling of apartheid in the mid 70s. It spent well over $12 billion and lost over 1,000 soldiers in 12 years of ECOWAS peacekeeping operations, particularly in the war-ravaged Liberia and Sierra Leone. The bulk of the ECOMOG troops and funds to end the wars were unquestionably provided by Nigeria. For nearly 30 years, the country has sustained assistance to countries in Africa and the Caribbean under its Technical Aid Corps scheme.
In all of these, Nigeria donned the �Big Brother� garb as it considered less imperative the need to compute a cost-benefit analysis of its foreign policies as is the norm in advanced countries. The United States, for example, hardly pledges its troops or funds in the name of foreign policy except for the protection of its strategic interests and well being of its citizens. The US-led 1991 Gulf War I, the recent Gulf War II, and its leadership of the assaults against Afghanistan, following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, etc., are classical examples. For the same reason, the US tactically refused to intervene in the restarted war in Liberia, despite the country�s closeness to it, being a resettlement for freed slaves from the US. The same goes for the lacklustre attitude of the developed world to the Darfur crises in the Sudan.
President Olusegun Obasanjo was particularly unhappy about the US� pussyfooting and empty promises in the Liberian case. He was visibly disappointed that the global community did not appreciate Nigeria�s material and financial sacrifices towards the realisation of a peaceful world. The president reasoned that if the world, particularly the rich nations, valued Nigeria�s global peace efforts, they would have since granted her debt relief. Worse still, is the fact that some of the countries assisted repaid Nigeria�s generosity with ingratitude. Nigerians have been targeted and killed in different African countries, including Liberia, as reprisals over vague disputes.
With the glaring mismanagement and dwindling of the nation�s oil wealth, which sustained the culture of prodigality in foreign relations in the first instance, the FG�s recourse to the economic potentials of diplomatic ties is a relief long overdue. The ruling elite must purge the nation of its borrowed, gratuitous image of �father� or �giant� of Africa. For, the United Nations Human Development Index for 2003 has shown that Nigeria is worse off than most of the countries it is playing father to. The UNDP global ranking showed that the quality of life in Ghana, Sao Tome and Principe, war-torn Sudan, Congo and Togo, is better than Nigeria�s. At least 70 per cent of Nigerians or an estimated 91 million people live below the poverty line. The ranking was based on average income per day, literacy level, access to healthcare, potable water, education and electricity.
For Nigerians to benefit from the new foreign policy thrust, therefore, the nation should address its problems of decayed infrastructure and low productivity. Industries must be encouraged to thrive and be competitive in the global market. The private sector should be carried along in exploring how best the nation can benefit from the new initiative. For, foreign policy draws greater respect when it is rooted in domestic strength.
