When Nigeria’s President Muhammad Buhari left the shores of Nigeria for the United States of America (U.S.A.) on Sunday, July 19, 2015, he was in high spirits. At the top of his agenda was a bid to secure America’s support for the war on terror, especially supply of arms and ammunitions to decimate the fledging Boko Haram terror group.
However, after the four-day visit to Barack Obama’s country, it was not the same Buhari that returned to Nigeria; euphoria has given way to pessimism and excitement to disappointment.
In his speech to the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), Buhari lamented the adverse impact of the Leahy law on the war on terror in Nigeria.
“In the face of abduction of innocent school girls from their hostels, indiscriminate bombings of civilians in markets and places of worship, our forces have remained largely impotent because they do not possess the appropriate weapons and technology, which they could have had, had the so-called human rights violations not been an obstacle,” Buhari was quoted as saying by Thisday newspaper of July 23.
“Unwittingly, and I dare say, unintentionally, the application of the Leahy law amendment by the U.S. government has aided and abetted the Boko Haram terrorist group in the prosecution of its extremist ideology and hate, the indiscriminate killings and maiming of civilians, in raping of women and girls, and in their other heinous crimes.”
However, the U.S. is treading a familiar path; it did the same thing with former President Goodluck Jonathan and Nigeria’s war-time ruler, Yakubu Gowon.
“The same thing happened during the Civil War. The Americas refused to sell arms to us. I wanted them to help me with some modest aircraft, so that I could chase out (Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu) Ojukwu’s B52 or B56 as they called it. That was all I wanted; not to shoot it down, but to chase it away, so that it does not drop bombs and kill innocent people,” Gowon told Nigeria’s The Punch newspaper of November 30, 2014.
While the Leahy law, introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy in 1997, prohibits the U.S. from providing military assistance to foreign military that violates human rights, Big Sam sells arms to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
However, the answer to America’s cold shoulder towards Nigeria could be found in the global dynamics of petropolitics. Since the shale gas revolution made the U.S. energy self-sufficient, it no longer needs Nigeria’s oil. Hence, Nigeria ranks low on the foreign policy agenda of the U.S. The situation is made worse with the recent Iran nuclear deal, leading to oil price crash and compounding oil glut.
It is, therefore, evident that Buhari must begin to explore other viable alternatives, and China comes handy. The truth is, the world is no longer unipolar, bestridden by the U.S. and its allies; it is a two-world order, in which China has emerged a global power. In this new world order, China has become a viable alternative to the U.S., and it behoves African countries to tap China’s capacity to meet their challenges.
Significantly, China has redrawn the global finance architecture; providing viable alternatives to the two hitherto domineering Bretton Woods institutions of World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). In their places, there are the China-led Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the BRICs bank. Despite the U.S. opposition, the AIIB has also won membership among its allies including France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom and Australia that have signed on with it.
In Africa, South Africa and Egypt are the only countries on the membership of the AIIB, and one wonders why Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy, is lagging behind. Even China’s EXIM Bank owned by the Chinese government has trumped the World Bank in international lending and its currency, the renminbi, is on its way to becoming a global currency, in the league of U.S. dollar. While China’s economic growth has slipped in recent times, it still has in excess of $3 billion in foreign reserves it could invest overseas to earn profit and extend its influence.
China also has the requisite weapon-manufacturing capacity to aid Nigeria in the war on terror. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) data records that China is now the world’s third largest supplier of arms between 2010 and 2014, surpassing both Germany and France. Though behind the U.S. and Russia, it is a pointer to China’s weapon-manufacturing capacity. In other words, rather than rue his fate, Buhari should look to China for arms and ammunition to contain Boko Haram.
On the other hand, China maintains a policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of countries, and this is one of its attractions to leaders in developing countries.
China is also swift to deliver aid to African countries without recourse to bureaucracy as with the U.S. and its allies. China-Africa trade has seen growth exceeding $200 billion in 2013 while U.S.-Africa was about $85 billion, a far cry from China’s share of African trade.
However, it must be pointed out that while China remains a viable alternative, African countries must work out a regulatory framework for engaging with China. They must heed the cautious statement of former Central Bank Nigeria (CBN) governor, Sanusi Lamido, “The days of the Non-Aligned Movement that united us after colonialism are gone. China is no longer a fellow under-developed economy; it is the world’s second-biggest, capable of the same forms of exploitation as the West.”
• Umejei is on the China-Africa Reporting Project at Wits Journalism, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.