Osaghae: NIIA Does not Take Federalism at its Face Value

The Director General of the Nigeria Institute of International Affairs, Professor Eghosa Osaghae, in this interview with THISDAY, highlights some achievements of the NIIA and the need for Nigeria to listen to the dynamics of its federalism. Dike Onwuamaeze presents the excerpts:

What are the high and low points of the NIIA at 60?

The NIIA is a research think tank. As a think tank its output is basically to be seen in terms of how productive its research has been and the extent to which that research output has served as a strategic resource for the formulation, implementation and evaluation of Nigeria’s foreign policy and engagements with the international affairs. The whole mandate of the NIIA is tied to the promotion of the understanding of international affairs by government and the citizens of Nigeria. So the NIIA undertakes a scientific study of international affairs all the time and within those studies the NIIA seeks to navigate pathways for foreign policy based on Nigeria’s national interests.

What are the key achievements of the institute at 60?

First and foremost, to have existed for 60 years is a major, major achievement. Secondly, if you are looking for outward indicators of how strategically relevant the NIIA has been to Nigeria you will find that it is from the NIIA that we have had many Ministers of Foreign Affairs, beginning with Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, Professor Ibrahim Gambari to Professor Joy Ogwu. We have had representations at the highest order, which are acknowledgement of the strategic input of the NIIA as a body. But I want you to know that many of the things the NIIA has in its engagement with the government are not made public. They are not things that we can begin to beat our chest. Those are statutory obligations of confidential and covert nature that the NIIA has rendered to the federal government. Nevertheless, the NIIA has been at the vanguard of the intellectual movement in Africa for engagement with those dynamic changes that have gone on.

For instance, in the 1980s when the IMF and the World Bank came up with the whole idea of structural adjustment, the NIIA was part of the team put together by the Economic Commission for Africa that produced the African alternative to structural adjustment, which was published in 1985/86. The NIIA was also key to the Lagos Plan of Action, which was adopted in 1980 as the template for Africa’s engagement with the super powers at the time and global affairs. The Lagos Plan of Action talked about the centrality of self-determination as a key to Africa’s actions and participation in global affairs. Over time the NIIA has also contributed to the conceptual clarifications of Nigeria’s frame works for engaging in global affairs. In the mid-1980s, Professor Akinyemi had the concept of medium powers that became helpful in the years the non-aligned movement had gone into recession. That conceptual framework was from this institute.

Also Professor Gambari came with his notion of concentric circles, which is a very useful framework for considering issues of foreign policy. It suggests that you have different domains or terrains or layers of your national interest engagements. First is with your neighbours and immediate sub-regions, then the region, and the global south and then the global affairs. Right now, the major things that should preoccupy our attention will be what are happening in the Sahel. Anything that will lead us, not only into good neighbourliness, but corporation and collaboration with those Sahel countries is key, which is defined within the framework of concentric circles.

What is the state of Nigeria’s foreign policy today because it appears as if the citizens are not feeling it?

There were times when we had dramatic interventions by way of foreign policy. That was the time Nigerian Head of State goes to the OAU to strongly advance Nigeria’s support for the MPLA in Angola and makes a land mark speech. Or when Nigeria goes to the UN to lead the anti-apartheid committee of the UN or when Nigeria intervenes in Zimbabwe to support its independence and when Nigeria proceeds as a frontline state in the liberation struggle in South Africa. Those were dramatic representations. But let me tell you what foreign policy means. It means your ability to advance your national interests in your engagements with other countries. This has been going on, not just in dramatic ways, but in very efficient ways.

When at the AU meeting the leaders sit together and said we want Nigeria President to lead the African crusade against corruption, they are simply saying that we can feel what you are doing in Nigeria as a landmark thing. When ECOWAS said that for COVID-19, it will make Nigeria the vanguard country to champion the thing it wants, that is a landmark thing. When in Mali they said let us get an emissary who is Nigeria’s ex-President, it represents an acknowledgement of what they see that Nigeria is doing. When AU is looking for who can help to mediate in Ethiopia and go to Obasanjo, it is an acknowledgement of Nigeria’s pre-eminent role.

At a time when you have all those kinds of conflicts you are looking for people who do not only have the history and experience but also the credibility to do the kinds of things the Emaka Anyokus did in the Commonwealth that lead to the transition in South Africa. We have a Nigerian as secretary general of the OPEC, as president of the AfDB, as the director general of the WTO. These are acknowledgements of the key roles Nigeria has played and continues to play in the multilateralism in the world. When you have issues to deal with in West Africa and Africa you have to carry Nigeria along. So, if the foreign policy has receded in any way these things will not be going on. If you look at the economic front, one of the levers of our foreign policy today is the strength of our non-state actors in the private sector.

All over the world it is now acknowledged that not only does Nigeria have the biggest economy in Africa, Nigeria also now has the leading business people from Africa. When they want to engage Nigeria it is not only the government you engage you also engage the non-state sector. Look at what the Dangotes, the Tony Elumelus, the Rabiu of BUA, the Jim Ovias are doing. When you go around Africa the banks are mainly Nigerian banks. You see what Glo is doing all over the place. I think that the focus on economic diplomacy and the diversification of our economic mainstay are critical things that are beginning to bear fruits that can be seen. I cannot agree that people are not feeling the vibes of our foreign policy. It is as active as ever.

Are we still the giant of Africa?

Nigeria remains the reference point for Africa. Remember that the African voice is never considered complete without the Nigerian voice. On major issues that attract global attention the world waits to hear from Nigeria. The giant might have been crippled at a point. But it is like a volcano, which even in its dormant state is still a volcano.

Nigeria is today is a buffeted federation with crises and security challenges all over the country. What is the way out?

Federalism is a living and dynamic man-made system. It is probably the most delicate system of government that man has ever founded. You bring it into being and you do a lot to make it work or else it fails. Federalism is very portent but it also has its underbellies. As long ago as 1978, the NIIA convened an international conference on federalism.

It led to the publication of a landmark book on Readings on Federalism. One of the key conclusions from that conference came from the presentation from Sir Shridath S. Ramphal, who was the secretary general of the Commonwealth of Nations at the time. He said that federalism is not something that you do by simply trying to adopt or write into your constitution what the textbooks prescribe; that federalism is more of the nature of the society that adopts it and that it serves. Federalism is not a system that is adopted in one fell swoop ones and for all. It is a system that keeps changing and as the dynamics changes the federal instrumentalities also change. Nigeria has had very strong regions in the past. Those strong regions in our own estimation led to a highly divided country and a civil war. One of the lessons of the civil war is the need to have a more united country.

The military government at that time thought that the best way to do that is to have a center that is stronger than the federating units. That was what took us to where we are now. But today we are saying, or this is the agitation, that maybe this is no longer the kind of system that we want to run. And therefore, it is in the nature of federalism that even in United States, Germany, Canada, Brazil, Australia that are older federations, the people are still clamouring for true federalism. So, it is not a Nigerian thing. But the narratives of what we call divisions are simplistic if you ask me. It is even a lazy way of characterising Nigeria. I think that our country is a lot more complex than that. I think that the tendencies, the mobilisations, the politicisations are a lot more complex. Look at the centripetal forces: in the 1970s till the early 1980s all the major football teams in Nigeria were representations of ethnic and regional identities.

Rangers Football Club was for the Igbos; IICC Shooting Stars was for Yorubas, Bendel Insurance was for Bendel and so on. It is unimaginable, from the point of 1970s, that a Hausa man will be the coach of Enugu Rangers. It was unimaginable that the captain of Enyimba will be a Yoruba. It would have been unthinkable. Secondly, when it comes to sports these agitations do not come in. We have had in this country at a time, especially for our female football team, all the eleven players being Igbos. Nobody talked about division. The second narrative is this: Nearly half of the people in Nigeria have mixed parentage. So, from what point of view is Nigeria divided? Who is making this division that people talks about? I keep saying that I haven’t seen any ethnic group in Nigeria that does not say that its ancestors migrated from somewhere else. So, I think the time has come to have a project on migration in Nigeria.

If we will trace these genealogies it will show that many are not who they think they are. When we talk about these divisions, from what I have said, it immediately becomes obvious that this is politics. They are politicising identities; they are politicising ethnic groups, religious groups, and communal groups and making them to fight. The question is who are those mobilising for these divisions and what do they want? I think that if you leave these things to Nigerians to negotiate it will be easier to resolve. We have to be a little careful how we analyse things so that we do not get overly simplistic. These are very complex issues and we must address them in the complex manner in which they come. For us at the NIIA, we have a more scholarly approach to addressing these issues. As we did in 1978, we do not take federalism at face value or simply as a matter of the constitution. We take federalism as social, cultural and economic and say that it is a complex of all these terms and individualities.

QUOTE

Nearly half of the people in Nigeria have mixed parentage. So, from what point of view is Nigeria divided? Who is making this division that people talks about? I keep saying that I haven’t seen any ethnic group in Nigeria that does not say that its ancestors migrated from somewhere else. So, I think the time has come to have a project on migration in Nigeria. If we will trace these genealogies it will show that many are not who they think they are. When we talk about these divisions, from what I have said, it immediately becomes obvious that this is politics