Russia is not alone in seeing oil as a means to transform its global standing. Nowadays, the mantra of Nigerian President Umar Yar'Adua, who took power last June following controversial elections, is to transform the country into one of the world's 20 largest economies by 2020. Yar'Adua and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are struggling to stamp their authority on an unwieldy and restive country of 140 million people, and the government views rapid growth as a means to achieving that aim.
Nigerians can use a dose of hope. Olusegun Obasanjo, who became Nigeria's first elected president in 1999 after nearly two decades of military dictatorship, left vast swathes of the country trapped in poverty when he handed power to Yar'Adua.
With oil nudging US$100 per barrel and energy-hungry giants like the US and China beating a path to its door, Africa's leading oil producer wants to use petrodollars to cure the nation's economic ills and flex its muscles in the international arena.
While riding the crest of the last oil boom in the late 1970s, Nigeria's military leaders nationalized the assets of British Petroleum and became champions of pan-African cooperation, financing several African liberation movements. The interests of the West and Nigeria repeatedly clashed, but Nigeria always stood its ground.
Inept government and economic decline in the 1980s and 1990s obliged Nigeria's leaders to focus on problems closer to home, like the civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone. But old habits die hard.
Nigeria has always sought a leadership role in Africa and its diaspora. Even in the turbulent 1990s, when Nigeria was temporarily suspended from the British Commonwealth following the execution of minority rights campaigner Ken Saro-Wiwa by General Sani Abacha's regime, the governing elite sought to achieve Nigeria's "rightful" place in global affairs.
There are now signs of a resurgent oil-driven foreign policy. In October, Yar'Adua joined South Africa and Libya in opposing US plans to deploy AFRICOM, its new African regional military command, on the continent. He then asked Nigeria's National Assembly to write off US$13 million of Liberia's US$43 million debt after Liberian President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf withdrew her offer to host the new command.
Nigerian officials are careful to disavow any link between this financial gift and Johnson-Sirleaf's turn away from AFRICOM. Nor do they voice their concern that AFRICOM could be part of US efforts to exert control on West Africa's oil-producing countries. But in confidential briefings, Nigeria has strongly hinted that it will not tolerate any foreign incursions on a vital and strategic resource in its own backyard.
Domestically, the renewed flexing of Nigeria's foreign policy muscles is being played out in the ongoing face-off between the new National Energy Council, which reports to the president, and Western oil firms, led by Shell's subsidiary, over when to end production-related gas flaring.
The government insists on a deadline this month, but the companies complain that the government's reluctance to fund its share of operating costs fully and rising political violence in the Niger Delta make this deadline unrealistic, and want it extended three years. The Department of Petroleum Resources, the regulatory agency for the oil industry, has dismissed these claims, vowing to impose hefty fines on companies that flout the deadline.
In the early 1990s, desperately short of hard currency, Nigeria negotiated contracts permitting the oil companies to develop new fields and recoup their investment before sharing profits. Now, following the companies' discovery of massive reserves, technocrats appointed by Yar'Adua to take charge of oil policy want Nigeria to get a larger slice of the pie. That also means ending government co-financing of operating costs and demanding that the oil companies tap capital markets to bridge the shortfall.
Department of Petroleum Resources chief Tony Chukwueke has also announced plans to create an African version of Petronas, Malaysia's state-run oil company, and transform the sclerotic Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation into a powerful oil-producing firm that can dominate the market in the Gulf of Guinea and other emerging regions.
Intense Western pressure has been brought to bear on Yar'Adua to re-consider this month's deadline. His election is being challenged in court by other candidates, and Western backing could play a role in stabilizing his government. But his advisers, some of whom played a key role in shaping Nigeria's foreign policy in the 1970s, are keen to use the gas-flaring issue to demonstrate Yar'Adua's resolve and standing as a pan-African leader.
But, as in the 1970s, the success of Nigerian diplomacy will depend on the government's ability to win legitimacy at home. That will require repairing and improving damaged infrastructure, generating economic prosperity, running efficient social services and taming the unrest in the delta region. It is not clear whether Yar'Adua's government can meet these challenges.
Ike Okonta is a fellow in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Oxford.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
Chinese Ministry of National Defense spokesman Wu Qian (吳謙) announced at a news conference that General Miao Hua (苗華) — director of the Political Work Department of the Central Military Commission — has been suspended from his duties pending an investigation of serious disciplinary breaches. Miao’s role within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) affects not only its loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but also ideological control. This reflects the PLA’s complex internal power struggles, as well as its long-existing structural problems. Since its establishment, the PLA has emphasized that “the party commands the gun,” and that the military is
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
RSS