African countries do not like Nigeria – Amb Dahiru

Gathering from his wealth of diplomatic experience, he is not impressed with benefits that accrue to Nigeria from her expansive support of other countries, and advises that Nigeria’s generous and largely supportive foreign policy towards member countries of the African Union and ECOWAS be curtailed, just as he observes that most of Nigeria’s foreign missions […]

Gathering from his wealth of diplomatic experience, he is not impressed with benefits that accrue to Nigeria from her expansive support of other countries, and advises that Nigeria’s generous and largely supportive foreign policy towards member countries of the African Union and ECOWAS be curtailed, just as he observes that most of Nigeria’s foreign missions are overstaffed. Excerpt:

How would you assess Nigeria’s foreign policy since independence?
Nigeria’s foreign policy has been successful in the sense of projecting a positive image for Nigeria, defending the interest of Nigeria and defending the interests of black people wherever they may be found in the world. But more importantly, Nigerian diplomacy has been very consistent with the decolonization of Africa and the dismantling of the obnoxious policy of apartheid in South Africa. Nigeria spearheaded all these things successfully to the extent that Nigeria receives favourable rating from all countries of the world. In fact, Nigeria’s foreign policy started before Nigeria became independent, if you remember, it started as an office in the office of the Prime Minister in 1957.  So, on the whole it has been a successful operation by the practitioners in the foreign ministry. From the time the foreign ministry was created up till about the 80s, the quality of foreign officers recruited in the foreign service was extremely high to the extent that people recruited at that time could be compared favourably with their counterparts all over the world. So because of the quality of officers recruited, it was very easy to pursue the foreign policy objectives of Nigeria. Now, if I say that up to the 80s the quality was very high, I am being deliberate. After the 80s, because of politics, a large number of officers got recruited and then the standard started falling.  We had the unfortunate reality of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not being adequately funded because of paucity of funds. Sometimes the ministry is hamstrung in its mandate of adequately representing Nigeria abroad. We got to the extent where embassies were starved of funds running into months before officers could be paid and in a situation of this nature it is very difficult for officers to give their best. So if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not in the estimation of some people adequately carried out its mandate, the problem rests with the government. You cannot give me an assignment and fail to give me the tools to work with. If you go to our embassies abroad, you will see dilapidated buildings serving as chancelleries, then you go to officers’ houses, you will see very poor furnishing and very poor locations.  When people see the huge amount of money that is voted for foreign service which is inadequate in the first place, they don’t even know that this money is going to be converted to  American dollars. By the time you do that, you find that it’s a small amount and by the time the money goes to the various missions who may have been in debts, as they may be in arrears of payment of allowances of officers, school fees, payment of utilities. So unless those in charge of allocating resources to the ministry dispassionately look at the problems of the ministry as unique from the home ministries, the problem of funding will continue and the officers of the ministry will not be able to discharge their responsibilities.
Why  do you think Nigerian missions abroad are being allowed to suffer this much when we have interests to protect?
The problem is at the headquarters in Abuja. When our missions abroad are asked to send estimates of their budgetary requirements, they will send and the ministry of Foreign Affairs will compile and send to the Ministry of Finance. The budget office will sit down and scale down what the ministry is asking for. Those in charge of allocation of funds should look at the ministry of foreign affairs differently, knowing that the ministry is a unique ministry where most of the expenses are incurred in foreign currency. The moment you look at billions of naira being sent to a particular mission which will convert to a little amount in dollars, we will continue to have the problem. So the ministry of finance should try as much as possible not to tamper with the budgetary requirement of our missions abroad. At the same time, even the budgetary requirement of the ministry at the headquarters should not be tampered with, as long as this tampering continues so will the problem of our missions abroad. If you want the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to discharge its responsibilities, fund it adequately. I am not saying that they should just be giving money to the foreign ministry like that, they must be properly monitored. There must be strict compliance with budgetary allocations to our missions abroad and there must be a mechanism where if you find any mission wanting, that mission should be called to order.
Now, what do you think of the manning of Nigerian missions abroad, some people think we should close some of them, do you agree?
Let me be honest with you, in my over three decades as a career diplomat, we have had what I will call “shifting cultivation”. You close down some missions this year because you say resources are too lean, then after about three or four years, the same missions are reopened and more are also opened. So in this stage where the presence of one country in another is a signal of the good relationship between the two, I will not advocate for closing down of the missions that we already have so that those countries will not feel that it is because we don’t reckon with them. President Goodluck Jonathan was at the United Nations General Assembly where he called for Nigeria to be made a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. If you are going for the UN Security Council seat, you don’t antagonize countries by closing down your missions in those countries because when the time comes you go to them to lobby. What I will suggest is that the ministry has to scale down the number of staff it has in our diplomatic missions abroad. I can tell you confidently that most of our diplomatic missions abroad are overstaffed. Where you need only about 4 or 5 people together with the ambassador, you end up getting 8 or 9. To me you are spreading the resources in a very lean manner. We should have a manageable number of staff with verifiable schedule of duties. If you reduce the size of staff in the missions you will be able to manage the resources well. I know that some people will not be happy with this but my position is that government is not a charitable organization; government has to give jobs according to what is available.
How do you assess Nigeria’s gains so far compared to her investments in foreign peace efforts,  decolonization of Africa and dismantling of the apartheid system?
Nigeria has made human and material sacrifices in the pursuit of its foreign policy objectives. Nigeria has never had any hegemonic aspirations, it is just out to support African countries and the black race where ever they are found, and the sustenance of security and peace in the world. Nigeria has not got commensurate reward from all that it has done, especially for African countries. I can say that Nigeria has not benefitted much from Sierra Leone, Liberia, Angola and South Africa. The period between 1970 and 1980 was regarded as the golden age of Nigerian foreign policy because it became a Frontline State in the decolonization and dismantling of apartheid. At that time, Nigeria was financially very strong, was vibrant.  Gen Obasanjo felt bold then to nationalize British assets in Nigeria and played a prominent role in the Lancaster agreement where the independence of Zimbabwe was negotiated. Nigeria operated this Father Christmas policy where you are ready to help needy African countries but you do not exactly say what you expect to get from involvement. For example, sometime ago, Nigeria did well for Angola. Gen Murtala Mohammed stood firmly for Angola and the MPLA government of Augostino Neto as the president of Angola. But despite all that Nigeria did for Angola, even to sign fishing right agreement with Nigeria, Angola did not approve. But then in the situation of this nature, who do you blame? You blame Nigeria. You look at what is happening in South Africa, perhaps it has been documented or not? I don’t know, but majority of South Africans do not know the role Nigeria played in South Africa. If you take away financial and material support, young people were brought to Nigeria to be educated at the expense of Nigeria; Nigerian civil servants contributed money from their salaries in the campaign effort to get South Africa out of Apartheid. But we don’t impose conditions before giving whatever assistance we want to give but I believe that we now have to change this policy because there is no free lunch. This policy of Father Christmas must stop.
I am not saying we should not help but we have to weigh everything to see what we stand to gain from it. What has reinforced my position is that, having served as a diplomat in so many countries and having interacted with so many people all over the world, especially Africa, I discovered that African countries do not like us. They only tolerate Nigeria. When the Senate President David Mark went to watch the final of the African Cup of Nations in South Africa, he came back to say that we do not seem to have friends, I was happy when I heard him say so because I have been saying so over the years. These African countries say good things when they are with us but behind us they say terrible things about us. That is hypocrisy.  They call us big brother then behind us they call us buffoons. So we have to be very careful in the way and manner we do things.
In that case, what do you think of Nigeria’s contributions to the AU and ECOWAS?
If you look at what is happening in the African Union Secretariat, has Nigeria got value for the money it has spent on the AU? Nigeria, I think is either the largest or the second largest contributor to the Union. The question is, are we getting value for the money that we are spending? Nigeria doesn’t  aspire to the position of the president of the AU Commission but what of other positions? Do you start pumping your money and you don’t know how that money is being used? If it means changing the way the AU secretariat is configured, Nigeria should change it just like the US does in the United Nations because it is the largest contributor. The Americans are not ready to pump their money into an organization where American interest will not be protected. So we should do same with the AU.  Nigeria is the largest contributor to the ECOWAS secretariat but how many Nigerians are working in the ECOWAS Commission? Okay, Nigeria may not be interested in the presidency of ECOWAS, but Nigeria should be interested in the commissioner in charge of finance and administration, in fact that position should be reserved for Nigeria because Nigeria is the largest contributor.  Nigeria should not put its money in ECOWAS and somebody else is spending the money without Nigeria knowing how the money is being spent, that I strongly object. Nigeria has to be decisive.
Does it mean that the policy makers did not strategise and analyse the situation properly in the past 53 years before putting our resources into organizations where we are not gaining from?
From my experience, sometimes there is a disconnect between the position of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the position of the government. So, as far as I am concerned, the ministry should be empowered to run the Foreign Service with the training of officers. Government should not overrule the decisions of the ministry. For quite a long time Nigeria has not bothered to look at what is going on in each organization, like the AU and the ECOWAS, but we have reached a stage where government has to be seriously engaged, more so, when Nigeria is paying so much money to sustain the organizations.  I am more particular about ECOWAS. The ECOWAS operates like a body that has no business with Nigeria which is objectionable to me. Nigeria, more than any other country sustains the ECOWAS secretariat, therefore, Nigeria must show more interest in what is happening there. Nigeria must head the office of the commissioner of finance and administration.  We must ask which bank is keeping the money paid into ECOWAS. Is it a Nigerian bank or a foreign bank? How many of the junior staffers are from Nigeria? I feel so bad about what is happening there.
Do you think Nigeria can clinch the United Nations Security Council seat?
It is possible that Nigeria will get the UNSC seat. At the moment Nigeria has the population and some of the attributes such as its record of involvement in peace keeping operations, so it is a peaceful country within its own territory and other countries of the world. Within Africa, Nigeria is a regional power so it has some of the requirements to be a member of the Security Council but Nigeria has a lot to do to convince the world that it is ready. We have to put our house in order so that others will take us seriously. We may even get some African countries that can challenge us; we have South Africa to contend with. You know that on the global scene Nigeria and South Africa are competitors and possibly with Egypt though they are more comfortable in the Middle East. South Africa may not have the population that we have, they may not have the peace- keeping records that Nigeria has, but it has the largest economy in Africa. And when the chips are down, they will look at which country is more organized. And that is why it pains me when I see some of the things going on in Nigeria. Nigeria should not be carried away by the endorsement of AU and ECOWAS because when the chips are down we may be in for a shock.