To most Nigerians currently celebrating the announcement of Nigeria as a mere ‘Partner’ in BRICS – the acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa which was recently expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates – Professor Yusuf Bangura’s timely intervention in his article published in the Daily Trust must count as a brutal wake-up call, an alarming reminder of how far Nigeria has fallen in stature in global affairs, particularly in Africa.

What provoked Bangura’s outrage is that despite its rich pedigree, Nigeria was not admitted into the expanded group but was rather included among nine other so-called “Partner Countries” of the group.

In case we have forgotten, BRICS was created to serve as a counterweight to the hegemonic tendencies of the G7 wealthiest Western countries in the world which includes the USA, UK, France and Germany among others.

The Partner countries, to which Nigeria was appointed, do not belong to the inner core of the expanded BRICS and cannot partake in its decision-making processes. At best, the Partner countries are not more than mere observers.

• JUST IN: Tinubu offers fresh appointment to Ganduje
• Tinubu’s administration about Nigerians, not party –Wike

Bangura’s indignation at Nigeria’s obvious snub should not be taken lightly because not only is he a scholar of international repute, his insightful knowledge of Nigeria cannot be taken for granted. The fact that he is also a non-indigene means he cannot be accused of ethnic or political bias.

Professor Bangura was among the legendary group of academicians who were part of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, when I studied for my Master’s degree in Political Science between 1987 and 1989 and I will remain extremely proud to have counted myself among his students at the time.

The faculty included the likes of the late Prof. Yusuf Bala Usman, Patrick Wilmot, Mahmud Tukur, and Ibrahim Gambari – who later became Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations. I was privileged to have shared the same academic environment with them in the course of my studies.

The period in which those excellent intellectuals were at the ABU is still widely regarded as the golden age of the institution. The recognition owed much to their excellent perspectives and how they positively impacted Nigeria’s foreign policy in the context of the liberation struggles across Africa, particularly during the Murtala-Obasanjo military administration.

 They enjoyed such a cult following that I even had their signed autographs on the wall of my room in the postgraduate wing of Suleiman Hall at the time.

To that extent, I was not surprised by Bangura’s strong views on the matter. As I have already stated, the vital intellectual contributions of his group essentially shaped the foreign policy disposition of the Murtala-Obasanjo administration which eventually led to the resolution of the various liberation struggles in Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Angola and South Africa.

It was for that exact reason Nigeria was officially designated an honorary member of the frontline states even when we did not share a common geographical border with the oppressed nations.

The gesture may have been merely symbolic, but it was in recognition of the massive respect Nigeria enjoyed among African nations for our vital contributions to the economic and political emancipation of the continent at the time. On that backdrop, it becomes easy to see where Bangura’s frustration oozes from.

Back then, we were taught that Nigeria’s foreign policy oscillated within three concentric cycles with Africa at its outermost core while the West African sub-region served as its vital base.

Today, self-esteem appears to have taken an impromptu flight from the articulation and disposition of our entire foreign policy under the current administration even if we must also concede that the previous ones were equally culpable for the embarrassing drift over time. 

Like Bangura succinctly recounted in the case of our ongoing romance with France; our nation is now effectively in bed with the very nations that not only worked against it in the past but have always regarded Nigeria as the most formidable threat to their hegemonic inclinations in West Africa and the entire continent in general.

It must be particularly painful to Bangura that ours has been virtually reduced to a client state of France with the poor handling of the ECOWAS crisis ironically under the chairmanship of Nigeria which spearheaded its creation in the 1970s for effective regional integration.

Today, Nigeria risks losing ECOWAS in its entirety and, with it, whatever illusions we may have nursed for the leadership of the sub-region not to talk of Africa or equal status in the comity of BRICS that is commensurate with our massive population and economic potentials.

Recent developments clearly suggest that individual preferences have been allowed to supersede Nigeria’s strategic national interests under an arrogant leadership that has done little to mask its transactional disposition to statecraft which often comes at the expense of ordinary Nigerians.

But for divine intervention, Nigeria could easily have been lured into a war with Niger Republic over a matter that could have been better addressed with greater tact and fidelity to the core principles of our foreign policy since the First Republic.

Professor Bangura deserves our gratitude for sharing in our grief.

Al-Ghazali can be reached via @Muhammad Al-Ghazali