UNSC: Imperatives of reform and push for sovereignty – Part 2

It is apparent that if the WHO Pandemic Agreement and amendments to the IHR are signed in their current form by the requisite WHO member states, they may pave the way for the erosion of health and economic sovereignty from African states.

Nigeria and other African countries must remember that they are sovereign countries. They have the right, as sovereign entities, to determine what is best for themselves and to reject anything that compromises their territorial sovereignty. Neither the UN nor WHO has the right to interfere in the governance of African nations. African countries have the right to enact laws that reflect the aspirations of their people.

Certainly, the UN or WHO lacks the locus standi to dictate to Nigeria and other African countries how they should govern themselves. A people without identity is a people without existence. Nigeria and Africa have their own identity. The UN and WHO cannot redefine who we are as a people. Africa cannot blindly adopt foreign lifestyles and impose them on her people. Nigeria and other African countries must reject any “one-world government” concocted by the United Nations and WHO that would result in the annulment of the territorial sovereignty of independent countries, especially Nigeria and other African nations.

President Tinubu also requested that the United Nations prioritise debt forgiveness or debt cancellation for Nigeria and other developing countries from creditors and multilateral financial institutions. He urged them to recommit to multilateralism by deepening relations among UN member states in line with the principles of inclusivity, equality, and cooperation. He stated that this was the surest guarantee of global action against the existential challenges faced by the international community.

On paper and in theory, debt forgiveness may seem like a much-needed relief for Nigeria and for countries overwhelmed by debt. In Nigeria, where many people are struggling with growing loan debt due to a tough economy, erasing some or this entire burden may seem appealing. However, debt forgiveness is not the solution to Nigeria’s ailing economy. To begin with, given her current fiscal indiscipline, imprudent spending, and the financial profligacy of her officials, Nigeria and many other African countries hardly qualify for debt cancellation. Creditors cannot but take into cognisance the lifestyle of debtor countries, and how they have utilised the loans they took. Sadly, many of them, including Nigeria, have not demonstrated the fiscal discipline and judicious use of scarce or borrowed resources, to impress their creditors. Even if Nigeria were to qualify for debt cancellation, debt forgiveness might signal an inability to manage its debt, making it difficult for Nigeria to secure new loans. Debt forgiveness fosters reliance on external assistance and diminishes incentives for fiscal responsibility. It may damage Nigeria’s relationships with international lenders, reducing the country’s influence and standing in the international community.

African leaders should wake up to the reality that the so-called billions of dollars given to African countries by their Western development partners have failed to produce significant development progress. Many aid-dependent African countries are poorer today than they were half a century ago. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Much of foreign aid involves giving with the right hand while taking back with the left. Foreign aid often comes with strict conditions or strings attached, and attempts to meet these conditions bring destruction to African countries.

Nigeria and other African countries should reject foreign aid. Foreign aid has underdeveloped Africa. The truth is that foreign aid is not the solution to Africa’s numerous socio-economic and political challenges. Rather than demand foreign aid or debt forgiveness, Nigeria should strategise to find her rightful place in the international community. For example, Nigeria and other African countries should prioritise transparency and accountability in their political leadership. They should strengthen their institutions, including the judiciary, anti-corruption agencies, and the electoral commission. Investment in quality education and developing healthcare infrastructure are essential, along with improving access to quality healthcare services. Nigeria should also pursue sound economic diplomacy to attract foreign investment and promote trade. Addressing insecurity, such as Boko Haram, banditry, and kidnapping, is critical, as is improving border security to control migration and smuggling.

Instead of relying on foreign aid and debt forgiveness, Nigeria should strengthen its trade relationships within Africa, particularly through the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the African Union (AU), and regional economic communities. Additionally, Nigeria should enhance its global partnerships by seeking membership in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa).

Membership in BRICS has the potential to offer numerous benefits, such as increasing Nigeria’s access to large markets and investment opportunities, thereby boosting trade and investment. It would help diversify Nigeria’s economy and improve its global competitiveness. BRICS membership would also facilitate cooperation with Russia in energy and security, Brazil in agriculture, and South Africa in mining, finance, and regional integration. Moreover, it would give Nigeria unimpeded access to the Chinese and Indian markets.

Concluded.