AFCTA: Between Big Brother Role And Nigeria’s

Nigeria’s adoption of Africa as the centrepiece of its foreign policy to liberate the continent from external influence, especially political and economic exploitation by the Western capitalist world, seems to be under threat by the treaty on the African Continental Free Trade Area ( AFCFTA). Though Nigeria reluctantly signed the agreement creating a single market for goods and services to boost intra- African trade, the Federal Government is hesitant in ratifying the free movement protocol to which it is a signatory because of the current infiltration of the country by members of trans- border terrorist groups, especially in the Sahel regions of the continent, writes:

SINCE her independence in October 1, 1960, Nigeria’s foreign policy has continued to tip towards Africa’s affairs. Nigeria has been playing the ‘ big brother’ role to other African countries, the reason it opened its borders for free movement of persons and goods from all African countries even at its own detriments.

Africa being the focus of Nigeria’s foreign policy implies that Nigeria places a high premium on issues relating to the continent in her foreign policy.

In the ranking of the major issues in Nigeria’s foreign policy, the ones concerning Africa take precedence over any other hence it is a fact that Africa has been the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy since independence.

The adoption of this policy dates back to an April 1960 session of the House of Representatives when some National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons ( NCNC) members of the House moved a motion for the creation of a

Department or Ministry of Pan- African Affairs. At that time, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, the leader of the NCNC, was known as ‘ Zik of Africa.’ Consequently, an All- Nigeria People’s Conference was held in 1961 to map out the strategies for achieving this objective.

The conference, which was hosted by an NCNC member,

Dr. Ozumba Mbadiwe and comprised representatives of political parties, trade unions, academic community, students, women organisations and parliament, made some far- reaching recommendations aimed at achieving the objectives.

Nigeria’s adoption of the Afro- centric posture in her foreign policy is a clear testimony that Nigeria attaches paramount importance to what a highly respected Nigerian, General Joseph Garba ( rtd) once referred to as the ‘ higher interests of Africa.’

Unfortunately, Nigeria’s afro- centric policy has yielded little or no benefit to her. Apart from the international recognition of her role and status in Africa, beneficiaries of her largesse, magnanimity and timely interventions in Africa scarcely show any form of appreciation to her. Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia, each of which became independent due partly to the financial and material assistance given to them by Nigeria turned their backs on Nigeria soon after their independence. The Republic of South Africa which enjoyed immense material and diplomatic support from Nigeria in her quest for majority rule was one of the countries that spearheaded the campaign that eventually led to the expulsion of Nigeria in 1995 from the Commonwealth of Nations over the execution of Ken Saro- Wiwa and eight other human rights campaigners.

The Guardian learnt that all these have remained a source of irritation to the Nigerian masses and government. Consequently, many patriotic Nigerians have argued against the continuation of the country’s Afro- centric posture at the expense of the masses, the country and its internal security.

Sometime in the past, a professor of Political Sciences, who was also Nigeria’s External Affairs Minister from 1985 to late 1987, Bolaji Akinyemi, suggested the adoption of the doctrine of reciprocity in the country’s foreign policy drive. It was gathered that this suggestion is consistent with the principle of quid pro quo ( a favour for a favour) by which a country’s largesse to any other country is reciprocated in one way or the other. Curiously, this principle is embedded in the foreign policies of the great powers. Thus, the so- called aid or loans often given to poor countries by such countries as the United States of America ( USA), Britain and France have both political and diplomatic implications for the recipients. This should be an eye opener to Nigeria that there is no free lunch anywhere in the world. ‘ Nothing goes for nothing,’ summarises this in local parlance.

Nigeria’s perception or self- image as the leading power in Africa is well founded. It is informed by the fact that apart from possessing a disproportionately large population, size and wealth compared to other African countries, Nigeria has always taken it upon herself to help restore peace to troubled spots on the continent.

Besides, records show that Nigeria is a status quo mediator in intra- African conflicts. This was amply demonstrated in Liberia and Sierra Leone. These are clear testimonies that Nigeria demonstrates an unparalleled political will to lead and speak for Africa. The characteristic willingness of successive Nigerian leaders to get the country involved in virtually all domestic crises in Africa creates the illusion that Nigeria has all it takes to be the policeman of Africa. This is an illusion of grandeur for a country that has many domestic problems to contend with.

In recent time, the country has been experiencing serious security challenges and this is affecting the ‘ big brother’ role of Nigeria in Africa, especially as regards free movement of persons and goods around the Sahel countries known to be the hotspots for terrorists’ infiltration of Nigeria.

In line with this, the President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration recently said it would not implement the ratification of the agreement on the free movement on account of the high level of insecurity in the country. The government was hesitant in signing the agreement establishing the African Continental Free Trade Area, based on these challenges. It took the country till 2019 ( 18 months), before it reluctantly signed the treaty, and is yet to ratify the free movement protocol.

Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, explained that insurgency in the Sahel region was one of the reasons Nigeria was reluctant to ratify the free movement protocol, but said the country had introduced a visa- on- arrival policy to ease movement in the country. He assured the African Union ( AU) of Nigeria’s willingness to work with the organisation to achieve free movement of people within West African countries.

A statement by the Ministry’s Director of Press, Afonja

Ajibola, said that Aregbesola gave the assurance while playing host to AU delegations who paid him a courtesy visit in Abuja. He spoke of his partnership with the AU in the realisation of the protocol of free movement of persons, goods and services across the sub- region.

Aregbesola, on the other hand, stated that the bloody aftermath of insurgencies, which posed a major threat to the realisation of the free movement protocol, particularly in countries in the Sahel region makes Nigeria hesitant to amend the protocol. He added that the ousting of the Libyan leader, Muammar Al Gaddafi, brought about a security breach in Nigeria via the proliferation of arms, leading to full- blown insurgencies.

The Permanent Secretary, Dr. Shuaib Belgore, said the Nigerian government’s hesitance to implement the protocol was largely due to insecurity, but he assured the team that consultation was ongoing with other stakeholders on actualising the free movement of persons and goods across the region.

Earlier in her remarks, the leader of the delegation, Rita Amokhobu, stated that their visit was to inform the minister of the outcome of their trip to the Benin- Seme border, which she said had accorded them the opportunity to gather information on how Nigeria complies with the treaty of the African Union on the free movement of persons and goods.

Reacting to this, experts said the short- term shutting of Nigeria doors against other African countries, especially the Sahel regions is necessary to secure the country’s peace, property and lives of the citizens from marauding terrorists. They, however, said the long term of it might be tantamount to a

the“‘ In recent time, country has been experiencing serious security challenges and this is affecting the ‘ big brother’ role of Nigeria in Africa, especially as regards free movement of persons and goods around the Sahel countries known to be the hotspots for terrorists’ infiltration of Nigeria’