In an attempt to formulate good posturing abroad, the Tinubu-led presidency made up ‘4Ds Diplomacy’ as its foreign policy. Put side by side with current domestic economic realities, ‘Development’—one of the 4Ds of Tinubu’s foreign policy will, arguably, be difficult to materialize before the end of Tinubu’s tenure. For one, development, according to Mohamed Rabie, an international political economist, comprises ‘the application of certain economic and technical measures to utilize available resources to instigate economic growth and improve people’s quality of life.’ And over the years, Nigeria’s development has neither been utilized for the benefit of the people nor has statistics shown favourable digits resulting from favourable domestic policy. Suffice to say that since 2014, Nigeria has been caught in the wheels of global economic headwinds. For example, following the 2008 global financial crisis there was a worldwide recession in 2009. The short-term and long-term effects of those two global events would reverberate across many countries including Nigeria in subsequent years. The latter would combine with the 2018-2022 fears of global recession and the 2020 global pandemic to have lasting impacts on the economies of many countries. Some of the consequences would be the frequent fluctuation of oil prices (a key component of Nigeria’s economy), debt crisis, acquisition of whooping foreign loans, foreign aid increases, and ill-timed policies like foreign exchange and import restrictions; all of which has kept Nigeria’s economy unstable. It is no surprise therefore that our economy has been winding down even more since power changed hands in 2015.

Consequently, it is preposterous to presume that development will happen in Nigeria anytime soon when the purchasing power of Nigerians and the revenue of businesses are being halved by rising inflation and quartered by multiple taxation. As of now, Nigeria’s inflation rate stands at 34.19 per cent. Tracing the immediate cause of such a tortuous economic experience has led Oluseyi Olufemi, an economic analyst, to hold responsible ‘Tinubu’s twin policies of deregulation of the oil sector (removing all subsidies on petrol), and of the foreign exchange market (closing the gap between the official rates and the black market rates)…’ More so, Oluseyi expects inflation ‘to worsen.’ As long as cut-throat taxation is maintained as a domestic policy, development will again be farther from Nigeria, and any tiniest effort exerted now to spur some semblance of development would be short-lived. If Tinubu cared at all for development, he would have introduced robust tax cuts on food prices, incomes, and businesses immediately after he assumed office. Had Tinubu done that, he would have been ahead of Senegal’s president, Bassirou Diomaye Faye, who cut back on food prices as the cost of living bites in his country.

‘Democracy’ is the second D of Tinubu’s foreign policy. While democracy is an ideal worthy of pursuit, there is irony in its use by this current presidency. The 2023 presidential election which Tinubu supposedly ‘won’ was marred by massive logistical and technical issues, a situation that cast great doubt on the legitimacy of Tinubu’s tenure. There is some further irony to his ‘democracy’ aim, too. Following the Niger coup in August 2023, Tinubu, as chairman of the Economic Community of West African States, was quick to suggest military intervention in Niger’s internal affairs in order to restore democracy there. Only the ruling by the Nigerian House of Senate rejected such a hasty executive decision which portended far-reaching regional consequences in West Africa.

‘Demography’ is the third D of Tinubu’s foreign policy. Nigeria has the highest population in Africa. For decades, several ‘elected’ governments have made promises about utilizing the country’s human capital alongside our abundant mineral resources. However, experience has shown their promises to be mere rhetoric. For example, in 2015, Muhammadu Buhari as flagbearer of the All Progressives Congress (APC), won the presidential election that year on promises of ‘Change’. What followed was elusive change and this continued into his second term of office until his tenure expiration. Throughout, Buhari was a president who belonged to himself. Buhari would hand over power to his party colleague, Tinubu, who campaigned on promises of ‘Renewed Hope’. Tinubu’s government is only over a year old and cries of economic instability have heightened. If anything at all, we should not expect anything different from Tinubu’s presidency. With a sharp increase in misery in the country under his watch, Tinubu’s ‘Renewed Hope’ has further shuffled Nigerians in a cycle of uncertainties. Yet, in spite of the abysmal socio-economic situation, Nigeria’s demography, dominated by the youth population, bears a great potential powerhouse for raising new national consciousness and industrial complexes in the country.

‘Diaspora’ is the fourth D of the Tinubu government’s foreign policy. Amongst other countries, Nigeria boasts of a thriving population in the diaspora, particularly in the US, where the Nigerian population is over 400,000 and ranks as the African immigrant community with the highest population. The remittance from these Nigerians abroad has been reported to be a source of revenue for the Nigerian government. In 2022, Nigeria, the largest remittance recipient in Sub-Saharan Africa, received $20.1 billion from Nigerians abroad. Last year, the remittance dropped to $19.5 billion. The ‘small’ fall in the remittance figure owes to what Iffath Sharif, a director at World Bank, explained as ‘high inflation and subdued global growth’ which are ‘affecting how much money they can send.’ If global recession persists, a drop in the remittance figure could worsen and this would be devastating for many families whose household income in Nigeria depends on remittances. It is deeply disappointing that given the fact that the remittance is some sort of lifeline to families in Nigeria and to the country’s crunching economy, Nigerians abroad who sweat out the remittance have continued to suffer poor consular services at Nigeria’s foreign missions and embassies.

The Tinubu-led government’s 4Ds Diplomacy suggests a pathway forward, but it is a rhetorical effort, and Nigeria needs more than rhetoric to move away from a looming implosion. Femi Otubanjo, a resident professor at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, believes however that despite the harsh outcomes, the Tinubu administration’s policies have been necessary. He told The Republic that:

There had been misgovernance, corruption, and poor management [in previous administrations]. So, when you want to understand the policies of this government in the last year, it has to be understood in terms of the curative elements of those policies which are bound to have consequences… The policies are attempts to move away from bankruptcy and the measures appear to be harsh but necessary. What we have had is an attempt to deal with the problem of the past with severe consequences for the cost of living and we are in a situation where many things are no longer affordable. That is how I see this economy trying to redeem the Nigerian situation with consequences that hopefully would be temporary. That we would have got away with it without any suffering was wishful thinking.

Tinubu’s 4Ds Diplomacy bears a well-intentioned outlook, but may not be appropriate for our current economic situation. Nigeria today needs a social welfare programme and limited taxation in order to wade off an impending domestic uprising in the country. While I believe Tinubu’s foreign policy is disconnected from Nigeria’s on-ground realities, Otubanjo disagreed, saying:

There is a connection. Tinubu’s economic diplomacy is driven by domestic economic failure. His pursuit of democracy is also driven by the need to stabilize democracy in his own country and the sub-region. There is a domestic element to the foreign policy that he’s pursuing. All this diaspora and demography are elements of the domestic environment to use all the resources available to get what he wants. Foreign policy is a product of domestic needs. It is what you need to look for outside. At the end of the day, foreign policy should be beneficial to your people.

Without a doubt, 4Ds Diplomacy is a good foreign policy that carries great potential benefits for Nigeria–if only transparency and responsible governance will be the values guiding its implementation. Besides, the current domestic policies in operation at home, which are already having an awful effect on the quality of life of many Nigerians, are not creating a favourable atmosphere to build 4Ds Diplomacy upon. On this some experts agree.

Former Nigerian High Commissioner to Singapore, Ambassador Ogbole Ode believed that ‘For any foreign policy to be meaningful; Nigeria’s domestic policy will have to be strong, coordinated and purposeful towards addressing pressing issues in the country.’ In the same vein, Austin Maho, an international relations expert, doubted the practicality of 4Ds Diplomacy policy. He said: ‘…the concept of 4Ds go beyond mere sloganeering. The focus should be on how we are going to transform and translate this vision into reality?’ Additionally, Maho questioned where the financing would come from; he stressed that ‘no matter how beautiful the idea is, financing is very key.’ Clearly, the 4Ds Diplomacy, a good policy at that, seems to be beckoning the country forward on the foreign scene while on-ground realities at home are stumps in the way. Nigeria today requires domestic credentials like efficient bureaucracy, rational organization of labour, and impeccable educational and economic management system to build a strong and enabling country domestically before projecting to harvest bountiful results from foreign policy forage.

Furthermore, there has been accusations that Nigeria’s policymakers did not take time to think through the 4Ds Diplomacy policy before unveiling it. Expert political scientist and former university vice chancellor, Femi Mimiko, noted that the foreign minister ‘actually enunciated it on the very day he resumed for work in August 2023, indicating that it probably had not been well thought through.’ Mimiko believed that the policy ‘certainly did not receive much input from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Nigeria’s broader foreign policy establishment.’

From the foregoing, Otubanjo sees a connection between 4Ds Diplomacy and domestic policies, while other experts had doubts about the feasibility of 4Ds as a result of Nigeria’s poor standing in the comity of nations and its limited power capability. Whether Tinubu’s 4Ds Diplomacy are connected or disconnected from domestic realities, one thing is certain, it would take the willpower of Nigerians at home and abroad to compel the government to take responsibility for burning issues at home and find timely solutions to them.