Former Director General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Prof Bola Akinterinwa, discusses various topics with DANIEL AYANTOYE, including the alleged poor funding of Nigerian embassies and the Israel-Hamas war…..CONTINUE READING....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

It was recently reported that state governors, former ministers, and other officials who served in the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari and political associates of President Bola Tinubu have launched an intense lobby for appointments as Nigerian ambassadors. What do you make of this?

Firstly, it is the right of any President to appoint whoever he wants to appoint as an ambassador. The President is considered the chief diplomat of the state; he delegated part of his power to the Minister of Foreign Affairs to act on his behalf. Meanwhile, there are two letters given to any ambassador-designate. The first is a letter of accreditation, while the second is a letter of recall. You cannot accredit an ambassador if you have not recalled the incumbent ambassador. When we say someone is Nigeria’s ambassador, the person is representing the President, and this means that since the President was elected by the people, he represents Nigeria.

So, that of the ambassador is not a direct representation. Many who have worked to get the President elected will want an appointment as a reward. Meanwhile, there are unlimited posts for political ambassadors. Normally, there are two competing candidates for the ambassadorial posts: career professionals who are already in the system and political candidates. When you are at Level 17 as a director, you can be appointed. The Foreign Service is not a place that should be like the civil service, where they sell things. If you don’t know your onions, you cannot survive there.

There are many reasons why people lobby to be ambassadors. For instance, those who have corruption charges want continued protection after they leave service; they call it diplomatic protection, and this is of two types, as provided in the 1961 Vienna Convention and as provided by private international law. People complained when the service chiefs under former President Muhammadu Buhari were considered for ambassadorial positions. Governors who have stolen money still have immunity, but after their tenure, such an appointment gives them another four years of immunity. So, everybody is struggling to get an ambassadorial position for protection. Another thing is that people like titles in Nigeria. If Tinubu wants to succeed as President, he needs to stop this special consideration given to political cronies. The problem with Nigerian politicians is that they are more interested in self-survival than national survival, and there are many cases to illustrate that.

You once mentioned that most ambassadors don’t recognize that they are under the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Why do you think so?

All ambassadors so appointed are under the Minister of Foreign Affairs. They are supposed to relate to Mr President through the minister, but because the political ambassadors don’t know the implications and because of their close rapport with the President, they tend to bypass the minister. There should be due process. The diplomatic protocols require that if an ambassador wants to travel, it is required that they inform the minister of foreign affairs because of their security. That is why I am saying that those who understand the regulation are the people who should be allowed to manage Nigeria’s foreign affairs at this critical point, and the reason is that the 2023 election has given Nigeria a very bad name.

Why do you think the election gave Nigeria a bad name?

The report by many election observers pointed to electoral malpractices, and people were reportedly killed. Why is it that it is only in Nigeria that we are having these problems? Also, you cannot claim not to know that the courts have just upturned the election of four governorship. What about the Supreme Court ruling on the presidential election? One of the businesses of the embassies is to monitor the day-to-day political activities in Nigeria. They do analysis and report to their government.

There were concerns recently that some ambassadors recalled by President Tinubu didn’t want to return. What do you make of this?

People do not know that living in Nigeria is not the same thing as living overseas as a diplomat. When diplomatic agents are posted abroad, they go with their families. Their children will go to school. So, if for instance, an ambassador’s child is in Form 4 in England and a newly elected President recalls him, what do you expect him to do? There is a need for long notice for them to return with convenience. Ordinarily, a person is appointed to serve for three years; if he is recalled within the first year, he will need time to adjust.

Doesn’t this mean that the system where Presidents make appointments at the tail end of their tenure is faulty?

The President has only four years within which he will want to achieve his set agenda. So, if he has to wait until one ambassador retires, he will have no story to tell. For any President that comes on board, the tendency is to quickly change and put his men there. The current ambassadors are those designated by Buhari, and they were his representatives, not Tinubu’s because the letters of credence given to them had the signature of Buhari. So, it is normal for President Tinubu to appoint his people. Though there is the idea that there should be continuity in government, it is not in this context. That was why I was differentiating between political and career ambassadors. The political ambassadors have different agendas; they don’t care. After four years, they go back to their business, but the career ambassadors are always available. Even when they retire, they are available for consultation. I think it is proper for President Tinubu to do what he has done.

There have been issues with the poor funding of Nigerian embassies in the past. What do you think is responsible for this development?

Many reasons; Nigeria is not known for engaging in strategic calculation in the world of diplomacy. Nigeria foreign policy is generally reactive; it is not programmatic. Our foreign policy has been the worst in the past eight years under former President Buhari. The former Foreign Affairs Minister, Geoffrey Onyeama, cannot be said to be incompetent because he worked with an international organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, before his appointment. He worked as an international functionary. When he was a minister, maybe he was not in tune with the presidency, and he did not want to run into conflict. So, he allowed things to move on. This is so because we had a situation where the former foreign minister always justified Western policy, which is ridiculous. And because they were always reacting and making only pronouncements, there was no need for funding. If you have a programmatic foreign policy, that project will require money. So, if there was poor funding of embassies, it was because there were no serious foreign policy objectives. Secondly, there is no more money to fund the embassies. Even though (Yakubu) Gowon said the problem in Nigeria was not money but how to spend it, currently, the money is no longer there; they are just borrowing and borrowing.

What can the Federal Government do to address the situation and avoid national embarrassment?

The former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Olugbenga Ashiru, came up with the theory of smart missions, which means reducing the number of personnel to the minimum essential staff. So, rather than having an economic counsellor, a political counsellor, and a cultural counsellor, you just put one person in charge who can efficiently carry out