The waning of Nigeria’s once formidable diplomatic influence has not gone unnoticed. A recent report by the International Crisis Group, Restoring Nigeria’s Leadership for Regional Peace and Security, published on December 11, 2024, offers a sobering analysis of the country’s diminished role in shaping regional stability. The document, which Nnamdi Obasi, Senior Adviser on Nigeria at the International Crisis Group, graciously shared with me via email on December 31, 2024, sat unread for weeks as I battled professional demands. Only last week did I take the time to digest its contents, and today, I share some of its valuable insights.
The report rightly highlights Nigeria’s fading clout, attributing it to domestic political instability, economic struggles, and security crises that have distracted its leadership from regional diplomacy. This is a critical examination that deserves commendation. However, it stops short of fully unpacking the internal bureaucratic inertia that has exacerbated the country’s diplomatic retreat. A truly holistic analysis would also probe how personal leadership styles and global geopolitical shifts have contributed to Nigeria’s diminishing voice.
A Giant That Stumbled
There was a time when Nigeria stood as an unchallenged force in African diplomacy. From its role in liberating Southern Africa from colonial rule to spearheading peacekeeping efforts in Liberia and Sierra Leone, Nigeria was a beacon of stability and Pan-Africanism. Under General Murtala/Obasanjo, Nigeria leveraged its oil wealth and military strength to shape the continent’s trajectory.
In contrast, the past fifteen years have seen a palpable decline. The country’s once-bold leadership has been replaced by a cautious, often reactive approach. The report chronicles this retreat, particularly under the administrations of Umaru Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari. While Nigeria has not entirely abandoned regional diplomacy, its approach has been tepid, lacking the strategic foresight of earlier decades.
The most glaring example of Nigeria’s lost influence is its mishandling of the Niger coup in 2023. ECOWAS, under President Bola Tinubu’s chairmanship, imposed severe sanctions and threatened military intervention – an overreach that ultimately backfired. Instead of forcing Niger’s junta to back down, these measures solidified its defiance and pushed it into the arms of fellow Sahelian states, Burkina Faso and Mali, which formed the Alliance des États du Sahel (AES). This diplomatic misstep underscores the need for a recalibrated, nuanced approach to regional leadership.
Diplomacy, like a chess game, requires patience and precision. Just as a grandmaster does not rush to sacrifice key pieces in a hasty attack, a regional leader must carefully calculate every move to maintain influence.
Lessons from Other Powers
Nigeria’s diplomatic slump is not unique. The rise and fall of great powers have been a recurring theme in global history. The United Kingdom, once the world’s dominant empire, had to recalibrate its foreign policy after decolonization, choosing to wield soft power through institutions like the Commonwealth. Similarly, post-war Japan, despite constitutional pacifism, remains a global player through economic diplomacy and strategic alliances.
For Nigeria, the lesson is clear: leadership does not always require overwhelming force. South Africa, despite its internal challenges, has maintained significant diplomatic influence by prioritizing strategic mediation and economic engagement. Rwanda, a much smaller country, has adeptly positioned itself as a key player in African Union (AU) affairs by emphasizing governance reforms and strategic partnerships.
If Nigeria hopes to regain its stature, it must learn from these examples. A stronger presence in AU peacekeeping missions, enhanced mediation efforts in conflicts like Sudan, and a reinvigorated engagement with ECOWAS should be at the top of Abuja’s foreign policy agenda. A nation’s strength is not just measured by its military capacity, but by its ability to shape narratives and influence decisions before conflicts escalate.
Rebuilding from Within
One of the report’s most compelling arguments is the need for Nigeria to strengthen its internal foreign policy machinery. The country’s diplomatic corps has been underfunded and poorly managed for years. Many embassies lack the necessary resources to function effectively, while ambassadorial appointments have often been doled out as political patronage rather than based on merit.
The crisis of competence is glaring. While seasoned diplomats should be at the forefront of Nigeria’s foreign engagements, political appointees with little experience have dominated key positions. The Buhari administration, for instance, appointed 60% non-career diplomats – far above the recommended 25% threshold. This has led to a loss of institutional memory and a dilution of Nigeria’s negotiating power.
To reverse this trend, Nigeria must reinvest in its diplomatic institutions. The Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) should be relocated from Lagos to Abuja, where it can better interface with policymakers. Training programs for career diplomats must be revamped, ensuring that they are equipped to navigate the complexities of contemporary international relations.
Navigating the ECOWAS Crisis
ECOWAS, once a pillar of regional stability, is now at a crossroads. The exit of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger poses an existential threat to the bloc. While the report acknowledges this crisis, it does not fully explore how Nigeria can spearhead a reconciliation process.
One possible approach is to offer AES states a new form of engagement -perhaps through an observer status in ECOWAS or structured economic partnerships. Just as the European Union has found ways to work with non-member states like Norway and Switzerland, ECOWAS can create flexible arrangements that accommodate regional divergences without outright severance.
Nigeria must also advocate for reforms within ECOWAS itself. The bloc has often been slow to respond to emerging threats, and its governance structures need modernization. Abuja should push for a review of the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance to better address contemporary security challenges, particularly those stemming from jihadist insurgencies and unconstitutional power grabs.
Strengthening Nigeria’s AU Role
Beyond West Africa, Nigeria must reclaim its standing within the AU. The country has historically been a dominant force in the organization, but its influence has waned in recent years. The failure to appoint a permanent ambassador to the AU in 2024 is a glaring example of this neglect.
Nigeria should push for greater AU assertiveness in resolving conflicts. The AU’s Peace and Security Council has often been hamstrung by bureaucratic inertia, but a more proactive Nigeria could help revitalize its operations. Abuja must also engage more actively in shaping AU policies on trade, climate change, and security cooperation.
Charting a Path Forward
The Crisis Group report provides a timely wake-up call. Nigeria’s diplomatic retreat has created a leadership vacuum in Africa – one that is being filled by a mix of rising powers, external actors, and regional fragmentation. If Abuja hopes to regain its stature, it must act decisively.
First, it must rebuild its foreign policy institutions and prioritize merit-based diplomatic appointments. Second, it must lead ECOWAS reform efforts while crafting a pragmatic approach to the AES states. Finally, Nigeria must deepen its engagement with the AU, ensuring that its voice is central in shaping continental affairs.
The road to diplomatic resurgence will not be easy. But as history has shown, nations that adapt and recalibrate can reclaim their influence. Nigeria has the resources, the historical pedigree, and the strategic importance to once again be Africa’s diplomatic powerhouse. Like a once-powerful athlete who has fallen out of form, Nigeria must recommit to the disciplined training of strategic diplomacy.
