No More Big Brother: How Nigeria Lost Her Diplomatic Edge In Africa

In the decades following its independence, Nigeria emerged as a diplomatic heavyweight on the African continent. The country’s foreign policy, especially during the 1970s and 1980s, reflected an assertive and confident regional power, positioning itself as both a leader in Africa and a key player in the Global South.

With its abundant oil wealth, growing population, and bold Pan-Africanist ideals, Nigeria often took principled stands in regional conflicts and was respected for its influence in institutions like the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), United Nations and the Commonwealth and the Non-Aligned Movement.

During the military regime of General Murtala Muhammed and later under General Olusegun Obasanjo (as military Head of State in the late 70s), Nigeria’s foreign policy was both proactive and unapologetically Afrocentric. Nigeria did not only championed the cause of liberation movements in Southern Africa, but bankrolled and openly confronted Western powers, particularly the UK and US, over their support for apartheid South Africa.

Nigeria was instrumental in the independence of Angola, Zimbabwe, and Namibia, and was known to have mobilized economic sanctions against oppressive regimes, backed by financial and diplomatic muscle. Nigerian diplomats played prominent roles in shaping the formation of ECOWAS in 1975, positioning the country as the anchor of West African stability.

Even into the 1980s and early 1990s, Nigeria maintained its status as a “big brother” on the continent. It played leading roles in peacekeeping operations across West Africa through ECOMOG (especially in Liberia and Sierra Leone), mediated in regional disputes, and hosted pan-African forums.

The country’s embassies and foreign missions were vibrant, well-staffed, and actively engaging in public diplomacy. African countries, including Ghana and South Africa, viewed Nigeria as a stabilizing force and a generous partner.

Nigeria’s foreign policy was then anchored by highly trained career diplomats, respected in global circles for their expertise, tact, and negotiation skills. From Lagos to New York, Addis Ababa to London, Nigerian missions were staffed with seasoned envoys who had climbed the ranks within the foreign service and understood both the subtleties of international relations and the nuances of Nigeria’s national interest.

However, by the late 1990s, cracks began to appear. Years of military rule had battered Nigeria’s international image, as human rights abuses and authoritarianism drove a wedge between Abuja and the Western world.

The execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1995 under General Sani Abacha’s regime, for instance, led to Nigeria’s suspension from the Commonwealth and deepened its diplomatic isolation. Nevertheless, the country’s return to democracy in 1999 under President Olusegun Obasanjo seemed to promise a revival, and for a while, it did.

Obasanjo, in civilian garb, embarked on an aggressive diplomatic rebranding of Nigeria. He travelled widely, restored relations with estranged allies, and reasserted Nigeria’s role in the African Union (AU), ECOWAS, and other multilateral organizations. He successfully pushed for debt forgiveness, improved Nigeria’s creditworthiness, and reinvigorated regional ties. But after his exit in 2007, the momentum began to slow once again.

In recent years, Nigeria’s diplomatic visibility and influence have waned significantly. Despite remaining Africa’s largest economy and most populous country, it has struggled to lead with clarity or consistency on key continental issues.

The country’s foreign missions have suffered from underfunding, neglect, and mismanagement, while many ambassadorial postings are either vacant or filled with political appointees lacking diplomatic experience.

This internal dysfunction, according to observers, is increasingly being noticed, and exploited, by other regional powers.

Tensions with regional neighbours like Ghana and South Africa have flared in ways that would have been unthinkable in Nigeria’s diplomatic heyday.

Ghana’s repeated harassment of Nigerian traders and the demolition of a Nigerian diplomatic building in Accra in 2020 sparked outrage, but Nigeria’s response was seen as slow and ineffective.

 Similarly, South Africa’s waves of xenophobic attacks on Nigerians and other African nationals have been met with lukewarm responses from Abuja, with critics accusing the government of lacking the diplomatic weight, or will, to assert itself.

At the heart of the matter lies the absence of career diplomats in many of Nigeria’s foreign missions and the consequences this void has created for citizens abroad and for Nigeria’s international relationships.

Experts say one of the reasons Nigeria’s responses appear weak is the gradual displacement of professional foreign service officers by politically appointed envoys who often lack the training, institutional memory, or diplomatic finesse to engage effectively.

While political appointees are not new to diplomacy, their dominance over career diplomats in Nigeria’s system has led to an imbalance that undermines continuity, expertise, and credibility.

Career diplomats are products of years of professional grooming. Recruited into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, they undergo intensive training, language immersion, and rotational postings across different missions. Their careers are built around mastering the art of diplomacy, understanding cultural sensitivities, negotiating complex agreements, and protecting national interests without jeopardizing bilateral ties.

Such envoys tend to have a deeper appreciation of diaspora issues, having interacted with Nigerian communities abroad over the course of their postings. They are also less likely to be influenced by short-term political considerations, since their careers depend on performance rather than political patronage.

In contrast, political appointees, who often emerge as rewards for loyalty or service to ruling parties, may lack the technical grounding and sometimes treat diplomatic postings as ceremonial. Critics point to instances where ambassadors were unfamiliar with the languages or policies of their host countries, or where missions became inactive under their leadership.

This absence of technical depth has had ripple effects on Nigeria’s diaspora communities, many of whom rely heavily on their embassies for documentation, protection, and advocacy.

Other factors leading to Nigeria’s declining diplomatic prowess according to experts includes, weakening of its domestic governance and economic strength. While diplomacy is often a projection of internal capacity, many have said that, with growing insecurity, economic instability, and leadership crises at home, Nigeria’s credibility abroad has suffered.

Additionally, inconsistent foreign policy direction, coupled with a lack of strategic engagement in continental initiatives, has been linked to the eroded country’s ability to build lasting alliances.

Moreso, the rise of other regional powers like South Africa, Rwanda, Kenya, and Egypt, countries with perceived clearer economic visions and more agile diplomatic corps, has shifted the balance of influence in Africa.

Nigeria’s once-undisputed leadership is now being challenged not just by traditional rivals, but also by smaller, more nimble nations with focused foreign policies and stable governance records.

Theses have led to many Nigerians abroad complain that their concerns receive little attention from embassies and high commissions. Reports abound of embassies failing to intervene when Nigerians face harassment, deportation, or unfair treatment in host countries. Inadequate consular services, and poor communication are recurring frustrations.

Nigerians in the diaspora, estimated to be over 17 million according to some reports, play a critical role in the country’s economy. The World Bank records that remittances from abroad consistently surpass $20 billion annually, making diaspora inflows one of Nigeria’s largest sources of foreign exchange, second only to oil revenues.

In countries like South Africa, where xenophobic violence has claimed Nigerian lives, diaspora associations have lamented the slow and often muted responses of Nigerian missions. Many argue that if missions were led by experienced career diplomats, they would be more proactive in engaging host governments, mobilizing international support, and protecting citizens.

The situation is not much different in Ghana, where Nigerian traders have repeatedly clashed with local authorities over trade restrictions. In many instances, Nigerian traders felt abandoned, with embassies unable to secure lasting solutions or even provide adequate mediation.

Recognizing the growing disconnect between Nigeria’s diaspora communities and official foreign missions, the Federal Government in 2019 established the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM), led by Abike Dabiri-Erewa.

The commission was tasked with engaging Nigerians abroad, harnessing their resources for national development, and addressing their welfare concerns.

Since its inception, NIDCOM has become a rallying point for diaspora Nigerians. It has intervened in cases of human trafficking, arbitrary arrests, and mass deportations. The commission has also spearheaded the Nigerian Diaspora Investment Summit, creating platforms for Nigerians abroad to invest back home.

NIDCOM has tried to fill the vacuum left by weakened foreign missions, frequently issuing statements, coordinating rescue efforts, and liaising with diaspora groups. During xenophobic attacks in South Africa, for instance, NIDCOM was visible in engaging both the Nigerian public and foreign partners.

 Similarly, when Nigerians were stranded in conflict zones such as Ukraine and Sudan, the commission coordinated evacuation efforts in collaboration with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

However, NIDCOM’s powers are limited. It does not have the legal mandate to issue passports, negotiate treaties, or act as the official diplomatic representative of Nigeria. Its interventions often require collaboration with embassies, which sometimes slows down responses. Thus, while NIDCOM provides a vital bridge, it cannot substitute for the professional expertise and authority of career diplomats stationed abroad.

To restore Nigeria’s diplomatic strength and protect its diaspora communities, analysts argue that reforms are urgently needed in the country’s foreign service, including; prioritizing career diplomats in ambassadorial appointments, strengthening the ministry of Foreign Affairs with better funding, training, and oversight mechanisms to enable it to groom diplomats and manage missions effectively. Investments in language training, digital diplomacy, and regional expertise will ensure Nigerian envoys remain competitive in a rapidly changing world.

NIDCOM should be integrated more closely into Nigeria’s foreign policy architecture. By creating formal structures of collaboration between NIDCOM and embassies, diaspora concerns can be addressed more swiftly. The commission’s direct engagement with diaspora communities can complement the official work of missions.

Embassies must be equipped with modern technologies to reduce bureaucratic delays in passport renewals, document verification, and other services. Establishing mobile consular units and online platforms can also reduce the pressure on physical missions.

To repair strained relations with countries like South Africa and Ghana, Nigeria must deploy skilled diplomats who can combine assertiveness with tact. Building strong regional alliances will also enhance Nigeria’s influence within ECOWAS and the African Union.

Meanwhile, experts have said that, unless Nigeria recommits to rebuilding its foreign service infrastructure, reinvesting in multilateral diplomacy, and aligning its domestic and foreign policy goals, its relevance on the international stage, particularly within Africa, may continue to decline.

The legacy of the 70s and 80s shows that Nigeria can lead. The challenge now is whether it still possesses the political will and strategic direction to do so in today’s multipolar and rapidly evolving world.