Brownlie (1990) defines diplomacy as any means by which States establish or maintain mutual relations communicate with each other with a view to carrying out political or legal transactions through their authorized agents. Diplomacy is a handmaiden of a nation’s foreign policy, as it helps to reshape, consolidate and further a nation’s national interest.
The world has undergone several ideological metamorphoses. Lord Keynes in his “Economic Possibilities of Our Grand Children” raised and vehemently propagated the mercantilist view of capitalist accumulation, but tried unsuccessfully to free himself from the rigours of questionable morality associated with development in the capitalist sense. Marxism tried to strip society bare of the inequality and alienation that are the necessary accompaniments of bourgeois society. Kwame Nkrumah taking a cue from Karl Marx his intellectual ancestor described dependency or neo-colonialism as the highest stage of imperialism in which the blind forces of exploitation wreck havoc on the dependent nation. That is why every independent nation guards against the deliberate operation of those blind forces of exploitation, as they have the potentials of bringing about arrested development.
There is indeed no capsule definition for national interest but there are various schools of thought. Whereas the subjectivists contend that national interest is the composite of actions and predilections of a nations’ leadership, the objectivists hold that the best interest of a State is a matter of objective reality. Basically, there are core and peripheral issues, which in varying permutations affect the diplomatic perception of the people. The defense and promotion of International Peace and Security, defense of social justice and human dignity; promotion of equality and self-reliance and the creation of a suitable political and economic environment in Africa and the world may subsume under the peripheral national interest considerations.
However, the protection of the territorial integrity of a nation, safeguarding the safety of lives and property of her citizens, and the protection of her sovereignty are essential ingredients of core national interest. But essentially, how a leader is able to harness her resources and strike a delicate balance between the prevailing circumstances and her core national interest objectives are critical to the advancement of a nations’ national interest.
Recently, most Nigerians were jolted to the realization that President Umar Musa Yar’Adua has accepted a Pact with the United States because Mr. President said the U.S. will assist Nigeria with weapons, equipment and logistics, and in addition establish a stand-by force to be made up of troops contributed by African Countries. The United States is obviously seeking an African headquarters for AFRICOM, which is currently domiciled at Stuttgart-Germany.
The new thinking is that AFRICOM would help African Countries confront terrorism, natural disasters and others that are likely to affect the stability of the Continent. President Yar’Adua did not end his diplomacy there, he and the American war-monger—Bush went further to discuss the volatile situation in the Niger Delta Region, arguing that the Federal Government will sign a peace agreement that will include all the militant groups operating in the Region. Why is Mr. President so vulnerable to the allure of endorsing the establishment of military bases in the Niger Delta and Gulf of Guinea?
John Pilger in his book titled “Hidden Agendas” pungently pointed out that the increasing inequality and poverty, the huge role of the multinationals in an era of globalization are all a euphemism for U.S. request. The United States of America is the Country least interested in the development of any Country in Africa, Asia and Latin-America.
Toni Negri and Michael Hardt in their book called “Empire”, also recognized how the U.S. and her cohorts are using International Capitalists Organizations such as World Trade Organization (WTO), IMF, the European Union and the United Nations to push for a world that will be America-centric and this the consuming goal is pursued under the guise of free trade, tariff cuts, foreign aids, and sounding the mantra of globalization. Perhaps Fukuyama’s “End of History” never adumbrated or rather underestimated the United States’ aggressive capitalist adventurism in the world using globalization as a platform.
When Mikhail Gorbachev – a moderate socialist adopted perestroika and glasnost to tear apart the legacy of the hitherto powerful Soviet Union, White House did not just rollout drums to celebrate a requiem high-mass for the dogmatic atrophy of an Ideology that sustained and stabilized the world balance of power. Beyond that, the U.S. also vilified Saigon, Nicaragua, Havana, Pyongyang, and Beijing among other countries that managed to stay afloat on the oasis of Socialism amidst the hurricane that is predatory capitalism.
For as long as the cold war raged on, the United States of America frustrated all anti-capitalist governments in Africa, Asia and Latin-America. In Ghana, the capitalists facilitated the ouster of one of the brightest stars of Africa, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah and initiated what turned out to be a protracted, corrupt military baskaap. In Somalia, Liberia, and Sierra-Leone, America propped up local capitalists’ hegemons, funded militia groups and later pretended to be peace keepers. For decades, those countries have known no peace, but America’s armament industry witnessed a boom.
articleadslinks
It is an avowed foreign policy aim of America to strengthen the regimes of dictators such as Samoza of Nicaragua, Batista of Cuba, Ian Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, Suharto of Indonesia and Pinnochet of Chile. The U.S deployed huge resources, intelligence information and strategic support to ensure that the dictators are made pillars of the “free world”. Saddam Hussein the late tyrant in Iraq was propped up in power by the U.S. when they saw him as a man capable of checkmating Iran and guaranteeing the free flow of oil. It was America who supplied Anthrax and other poisonous biological weapons to liquidate the Kurdish rebels. The same country turned out to demonize him when he refused to do their bidding. The U.S. government values her economic interest in crude oil than the blood of the inhabitants of these nations.
Since the war loving George Walker Bush Jr. ascended power in very controversial circumstances, the U.S has made terrible diplomatic blunders in the Middle East, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. The oil in the Caspian Sea is gradually become elusive to America the greatest consumer of fossil fuel as Russia has re-asserted her dominance in the power game and Petro-dollar diplomacy. America has only started to invest in bio-fuel technology but this may take some time to mature hence America may not be in a hurry to endorse the Kyoto Protocol. With America’s badly dented diplomatic image in the Middle East, the desperate Bush’s leadership is searching for new friends in Africa. Recognizing the strategic importance and power of Nigeria in the African continent, the country has been wooed as the beautiful bride of the U.S.
This is what underpins America’s recent proposal to establish a military base in Nigeria. Unfortunately, President Yar’Adua may not have a smattering knowledge of diplomacy, which is a dynamic enterprise that is not susceptible to the laws of pure science. It is my humble guess that if Mr. President may was familiar with the botched Anglo-Nigerian Defense pact of 1962, which sought to establish a military base in Nigeria, his decision to endorse AFRICOM would have been an emphatic NO. The Anglo-Nigerian Defense Pact was rejected because of nation wide students’ protests.
America the self acclaimed police of the world is enemy number one in the whole world and this venom of hatred is worst in the Arab world. The experience in Iraq, Afghanistan Pakistan and Guantanamo Bay are telling testimonies of America’s overzealousness and assertiveness in global diplomacy. Taking full cognizance of these events, it will be suicidal for Nigeria to enter into that unholy wedlock masked in AFRICOM as the consequences of implementing AFRICOM in the Niger Delta and Gulf of Guinea would be disastrous. The capitalists carefully coined the term free world as a grand euphemism for permissiveness and U.S. re-colonization of the world. Three of such consequences may be highlighted here.
First, America’s presence in Nigeria will make the peaceful country a target of global terrorism and this will spell down for Nigeria especially when there are rumours of Al Qaeda recruitments into the militia groups. This will fuel extreme religious fundamentalism such as the Risorgimento of Boko Haram and heighten unrest in Nigeria especially the already volatile Niger Delta Region and the arid Region close to the fringes of the Sahara.
Secondly, when Al Qaeda is combined with the militancy in the Niger Delta, it is tendentious to suggest that AFRICOM will further instigate interminable internal insurrection that is capable of destabilizing the Region. Already the Niger Delta is inundated with militia groups in and the establishment of military bases in Nigeria and in the Gulf of Guinea will facilitate the disintegration of the country. There is MOSOP which seeks to create a separate State for the Ogoni ethnic nationality in the present Rivers State. The Ralph Uwazuruike led MASSOB has been vehemently agitating for the creation of a sovereign State of Biafra, while MEND in the Niger Delta may come out of the Amnesty stronger to demand for a separate State for the fourth largest tribe in Nigeria. The on-going consultations about the constitutional review has shown that most Nigerians would not want the present Nigerian State to endure if it is sustained without equity, fairness and fiscal federalism.
Perhaps, America’s subterranean move is to fast-track the disintegration of Nigeria so as not to reduce her policeman role in Africa because with a disintegrated Nigeria, America will ambush the country’s strategic interest and violate with impunity Nigeria’s age-long concentric-circle interest theory. Nigeria is the 10th most populous country in the world and it is ridiculous for Nigeria-the colossus of Africa to be reduced to a footnote of American imperialism.
President Barack Obama of the United States of America, during his campaigns made it clear that there can be no military solution in Iraq. He further said the best way to keep America safe is not to threaten terrorists with nuclear weapons, it’s to keep nuclear weapons away from terrorists. This is the best way to tackle the impending Al Qaeda penetration. Already, the Federal Government Amnesty programme is showing signs of failure and President Yar’Adua is nowhere to be found. The Vice President cannot explain the state of the nation because he has not been permitted so to do. With the President’s inability to address the nation as demanded by human rights groups, Nigeria seems to be at a standstill and all the revolutionaries have gone on sabbaticals.
Now that the Nigerian President cannot address the nation, have we admitted like Karl Maier that Nigeria is now a victim of the” Dutch Disease”? Have our statesmen admitted like Francis Fukuyama that Nigeria’s foreign policy makers have endorsed the capitulation of our sovereignty to the United States? Will the Farouk Mutallab issue tempt America to reconsider the AFRICOM option? Will America understand that what an average American gets free of charge, a Nigeria can only achieve through fasting and prayer? The average Nigerian undergoes fasting and prayer before getting potable water, electricity, food and employment. Nigerians also pray that their jobs are secure. My dispassionate analysis of the situation is that the greatest problem facing Nigeria is neither terrorism nor Al Qaeda but corruption, hunger, poverty and bad governance. The unemployment challenge coupled with lack of social security is a potential threat, as unemployed people can very easily be recruited into any fiery brand of fundamentalist movement that would do battle with the Nigerian State.
At least, the Farouk Mutallab incident has broken Nigeria’s crude oil monoculture, as the country can now export crude oil and terrorism. The world now knows that Nigerian adults can be brain-washed in Europe to such a level as to export terror. Ordinarily, Nigeria could not have provided a safe haven for fundamentalists hence America’s reconsideration of AFRICOM may not be necessary. President Barack Obama should not succumb to the antics of his predecessor, as a stable Nigeria is crucial for the stability of the African continent. The present administration is deeply rooted in the push for world government, which has been the consuming aim of the West, at least in principle. Nigeria is a country where the cliché rule of law has been subjected to horrendous abuses, certainly not with the beatification of corrupt people.
Now, Nigeria has a President they can never see. We may see him through prayer or better still consult a necromancer. The power vacuum created by the absence of President Umar Musa Yar’Adua is likely to precipitate deep constitutional crisis, with dreadful forebodings. I believe that Vice President Goodluck Jonathan should begin to carry out the functions of the President whether he has an official letter to do so or not. After all, it is implied that in the absence of the President, the Vice President holds proxy. Vice President Goodluck Jonathan should organize his own swearing-in as was done by the Chief Justice of Nigeria. This is the appropriate thing to do until President Yar’Adua comes back from Jeddah.
Idumange John, Is a University Lecturer and Activist
articleadsbanner
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });