Opinion

Israel vs Iran: What is Nigeria’s foreign policy thrust?

Published

1 year ago

June 19, 2025

Nigeria’s foreign policy on the Israel Iran conflict is under scrutiny, prompting questions about national interest and the nation’s role in international affairs

“Countries have no permanent friends or enemies but permanent interests” – Lord Palmerston, 19th century British Prime Minister.

I was aghast when I read of Nigeria poking her nose into the scuffle between Israel and Iran. What is our own, as they say, in the long-standing enemity between Jews (Israelis) and Persians (Iranians)?

Is our beef ethnic, economic, political, religious, moral high ground or what? Are we being goaded by some interests around President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to take the side of Iran for religious reasons? Or are we just playing busybody and meddlesome interloper?

What special interest(s) do we have in each of the countries trading missiles that will injure us irreparably, thus forcing us to come out with the statement issued by our government?

In other words, what special loss are we likely to suffer that other countries or peoples are not going to suffer, thus putting a heavy burden on us to speak out as forcefully as we have done while many other countries have maintained stoic silence or have sat on the fence; acting neither here nor there?

The statement by our government blamed Israel for its “preemptive strike” at about a hundred Iranian military facilities, killing top military officers and scientists, including civilians, and inflicting a huge damage whose actual extent is yet to be fully determined.

We also preached peace, urged restraint, advised negotiation and warned against escalation of hostilities that may spread beyond the theatres of conflict and consume the entire region as well as other parts of the world.

The beginning of the statement which condemned Israel for its “preemptive strike” should have been omitted. The other parts of the statement are passable.

Now, Israeli leaders will laugh at us as they read the opening part of our statement condemning their action. If I were to help them draft a response, it would be a terse: “Thank you very much, Mr. Busybody and Meddlesome Interloper!

We are not like you! You who opened your eyes and watched as Fulani terrorists came from all over the world to turn your entire territory into killer-fields, drenched in blood, before you woke up from your slumber!

You are now running from pillar to post when a preemptive strike by you, such as we have taken against Iran, would have saved you all the trouble and irreparable losses still ongoing.

Thank you for your advice on the need for restraint and peace. Ever heard the statement: ‘A stitch in time saves nine’ ? That is our own advice to you!”

There are many of our own people’s wisdom that preach preemptive strikes. One says to avoid that protruding branch of a tree from poking you in the eye, take notice of it (dodge it) from afar.

Another says if you know that your eye-balls are sunk deep inside their sockets, start to cry early so that enough tears can quickly well in your eyes for people to notice.

One more: You do not wait for the insect called “talubo” to enter your eyes before taking precautionary measures.

There is this other one that says you must begin to trim the branches of the “iroko” tree while it is still tame-able; otherwise, once it grows too tall for your reach, the task becomes herculean.

Delay is dangerous. Have you forgotten that nursery rhyme: Tick says the clock/Tick-tick/What you have to do/Do quick”!

Iran is unapologetically, unabashedly, and undeniably a sworn foe of the State of Israel – in the same league with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

They want the destruction of Israel and have sworn NEVER to recognise it; neither as a sovereign and independent state nor its right to exist.

And they have their justifications: The way and manner the State of Israel was created in 1948 by the Western Powers on a land the Palestinians believed was theirs and the fact that Israel was also favoured with a disproportionate portion of the land.

According to Google, “The Jewish State allocated to the Jews, who constituted a third of the population and owned 7% of the land, was to receive 56% of Mandatory Palestine, a slightly larger area to accommodate the increasing number of Jews who would immigrate there”.

The portion left for the Palestinians – West Bank and Gaza Strip – was also disjointed. Unable to stomach this “daylight injustce”, as someone had described it, the Palestinians, supported by some Arab/Middle East countries, have fought wars against Israel but with every war, won by Israel, they have lost more territories out of the measly ones they originally got.

Not only that, the other Arab/Middle East countries supporting them have also lost territories to Israel. These are called the “occupied territories”.

Israel has seized portions after portions of what was originally allocated to the Palestinians and has built “settlements” there for its citizens.

Resolution after resolution by the UN censoring Israel and ordering it back to its original UN boundaries have been spurned by the Jewish State.

Israel’s backbone is the United States, Britain and the other Western Powers that have given the Jewish State military, financial, diplomatic, and moral support.

The Achilles’ heel of the Palestinians and their backers is their lack of unity as well as military inferiority to their opponents.

With the backing of the superpowers, Israel has also developed into a military power of its own, able to go solo on occasions, even when its backers urge restraint.

So, if Israel would not heed the superpowers’ call for restraint, is it Nigeria’s tepid call that amounts to a mere irritation, at best, that it will heed?

Seeing the hopelessness of their situation, many Arab countries have negotiated peace with Israel; thereby recognising its right to exist as a sovereign and independent state.

Some others have not said so openly but have desisted from openly antagonising it.

The recent fall of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria has further depleted the ranks of the countries vigorously opposed to Israel.

Iran, undeterred, has continued the struggle, reasoning that it must be militarily strong enough not only to withstand Israel but also to stand a chance of achieving her goal against it.

The only road to that objective is for it to become a nuclear-power nation.

Therefore, Iran has feverishly pursued its nuclear arms project, insisting that it is for peaceful purposes while those opposed to it believe it is not.

To Israel and its backers, therefore, to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is a task that must be done. To Iran on the other hand, to acquire the nuke is also a mission that must be accomplished!

But, of course, we cannot overlook the original injustice that has made the land of Palestine the theatre of horrendous wars and bloodshed since 1948 and the initial rejection of the UN two-state policy and the right of Israel to exist by the Palestinians and their backers.

We cannot but also note the ceaseless violation of international law by Israel and its backers.

Having said that, international relations are power relations in the real sense of the word. The strong and powerful have their way while the weak suffer what they must, until they, too, are strong enough to upturn the applecart.

As Rousseau admonished, “The strong is never strong enough to be always the master unless he transforms strength into right and obedience into duty”.

We have seen the rise and fall of empires and yesterday’s superpowers today do folow-follow and yes-sir to the new sheriffs in town.

Who says the balance of forces will not change in Palestine or the Middle East in years, decades or centuries to come?

Gone were the days when Nigeria commanded a powerful and influential voice in the international arena; when we were a very important member of the Non-Aligned Nations (which itself has gone into oblivion); and when we could ask a sitting US president to shut up and stop dictating to African leaders!

Gone were the days when Africa was the cornerstone of our foreign policy and we championed the decolonisation efforts in other parts of the continent; when we nationalised British-owned companies and led the fight against apartheid colonialism in southern Africa, earning us the distinguished position of a Frontline State in the battle!

Gone were the days when we almost single-handedly championed ECOMOG and brought peace to battle-ravaged Liberia and Sierra Leone!

Gone were the days of Pax Nigeriana! Gone were the days when African nations catch cold and the international community takes notice anytime we sneeze.

Today, minnows like Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso poke their fingers in the eye of the “Giant of Africa” A giant with the feet of clay!

Economic power feeds military power and, together, both translate into powerful nations with a voice in international affairs.

Run-down and decrepit countries like Nigeria are jokers if they jostle for attention or relevance when superpower nations are talking or doing their own thing.

The best we can do at the moment is put our head down, like China did, and work our way up without making any useless noise and flexing muscles that we do not possess, which can only draw unwarranted attention to us with dire consequences!!

By Bola BOLAWOLE, Chairman of Punch Editorial Board and Deputy Editor-in-chief

Opinion

Government should stop funding sports

Published

18 hours ago

August 24, 2026

Mariam Balogun

By Ehi Braimah,

Nigeria should stop pretending that pouring public money into sports is the same thing as developing sports. It is not. For decades, government has funded football through grants, interventions, bonuses, camps, competitions, travel and assorted forms of financial assistance.

Also read:Valverde Confirmed as Real Madrid Captain Under Mourinho

Yet, the more government spends, the more dysfunctional the system appears to become. At what point do we admit that the model itself is broken?

The latest evidence is staring us in the face. The Super Eagles did not participate at the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico.

Nigeria also missed Qatar 2022 which means the Super Eagles have now missed two consecutive World Cups.

This is particularly painful and a bitter pill to swallow because Africa had ten places at the expanded 48-team tournament. Nigeria still could not make it. The Eagles finished second in their qualifying group and subsequently lost to DR Congo on penalties in the African play-off.

Football is Nigeria’s drumbeat. It is one of the few things capable of bringing together Nigerians across ethnic, religious, political and social divides.

When the Super Eagles play, the country stops, and when they win, Nigeria celebrates together. That is why this failure hurts so much.

But the crisis is deeper than the Super Eagles. The Super Falcons, once the undisputed queens of African women’s football, have suffered an even more devastating setback. Nigeria lost 1-0 to Cameroon in the WAFCON quarter-final and subsequently lost 2-1 to South Africa in the play-off for a place in the 2027 Women’s World Cup in Brazil.

Consequently, Nigeria will miss the Women’s World Cup for the first time since the competition began in 1991. This is not an ordinary footballing disappointment – it is an egregious warning signal.

And the response cannot simply be another change of personnel. I have seen this movie before. Whenever Nigerian football enters crisis mode, the familiar chorus begins: sack the NFF president; dissolve the board; bring in new people; start afresh. But where has that taken us?

We do not have a single enduring football structure, or world-class facilities. The lack of a properly functioning grassroots development system and the absence of a sustainable football economy appear to compound our misery. We keep changing the occupants of the house without repairing the house.

That is why I do not subscribe to the clamour by Shehu Dikko and others seeking to take over Nigerian football.

Those who have been part of the system – including Dikko – that produced today’s crisis should not simply return under another arrangement and promise us another “new beginning”.

Nigerians deserve to know what went wrong, who is responsible and, most importantly, what structural reforms will prevent a repetition.

The question is not merely whether Ibrahim Gusau, the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) President, and the board and should go. The bigger question is: what system replaces them?

There is no escaping the issue of accountability. The House of Representatives has previously moved to investigate allegations concerning about $25 million in FIFA and CAF grants received by the NFF between 2015 and 2025.

More recently, the NFF itself confirmed that documents relating to a ₦12 billion Federal Government intervention fund are with the EFCC and ICPC as part of ongoing investigations.

Importantly, no wrongdoing has been established against any individual merely because an investigation exists, or that stories of alleged corruption are always what we hear.

But the fact that such a substantial public intervention is under investigation makes transparency imperative.

There have also been media investigations raising questions about payments from NFF funds into private accounts.

One investigation reported at least ₦152.6 million in payments to private accounts linked to officials, staff and associates between 2018 and 2026. These allegations require proper investigation, not political spin or the influence of godfathers.

The NFF, on its part, says its accounts are audited and that FIFA and CAF funds are tied to specific purposes and subject to monitoring. Its 2025 Congress approved audited financial statements for 2024 and passed a vote of confidence in the Gusau-led board. That is precisely why Nigerians need independent, verifiable accountability, not competing narratives.

If the books are clean, open them, and if the money was properly spent, show us. If there were failures, identify them, and if officials are culpable, let the law take its course. That is how a serious football economy works.

Government must also accept responsibility for creating a system that encourages dependency.

Why should government be paying the Super Eagles’ win bonuses? Why should a national football federation continually return to government for money to perform its core responsibilities? Why should taxpayers repeatedly finance a professional sport that possesses enormous commercial potential? Questions that need answers.

This is definitely not an argument for abandoning sports – it is a business case for changing the role of government.

My view is that government should provide infrastructure, establish the regulatory framework, protect the integrity of competitions and create an enabling environment for private investment.

Government should not be the perpetual financier of professional football. This Father Christmas mentality must end. Look at the state of our sporting infrastructure and see the shame we have brought upon ourselves because of poor visionary leadership at the helm.

CAF’s rejection of several traditional home grounds for Nigerian clubs in the 2026/27 continental competitions is a humiliating reminder that Nigeria still lacks enough facilities that meet international standards.

Rangers, Rivers United and Shooting Stars were among the clubs whose traditional venues were not approved, leaving them to adopt alternative grounds.

The Federal Government itself has acknowledged the problem, approving major rehabilitation work at the Moshood Abiola National Stadium in Abuja because its condition has limited its use by national teams.

If we didn’t have the Godswill Akpabio International Stadium, the Nest of Champions owned by the Akwa Ibom State government in Uyo, where would the Super Eagles have been playing their FIFA-graded home matches?

This is the absurdity of Nigerian sports: we can spend billions managing crises but cannot consistently maintain the infrastructure that would prevent them.

Morocco offers one of the best examples in Africa of what a country’s sports infrastructure should look like. Perhaps that explains why the country has a “strong hold” on CAF.

Secondary-school sports have virtually disappeared as a serious talent-development pipeline. Adults sometimes compete in sporting events designed for children; grassroots competitions are sporadic; facilities are in a permanent state of decay, and leagues struggle.

When an athlete or team produces an accidental success, we celebrate it as if it were the product of a functioning system. That is clearly not the case – it is usually an outlier.

The reality is that we are trying to climb the tree from the top and then wonder why we keep falling. The National Sports Commission under Chairman Shehu Dikko must therefore act – and act now.

The Commission has a historic opportunity to redefine the relationship between government and Nigerian sports. Its stated ambition of creating a sustainable sports economy cannot remain another slogan – it must become a measurable programme of reform.

The first step should be to distinguish clearly between government’s responsibility and the sports industry’s responsibility.

Government should fund infrastructure; support grassroots and school sports, and provide a carefully structured seed funding to revive dead or dying leagues.

Government should also use the National Lottery Trust Fund more strategically. Nigeria already has a mechanism specifically designed to support good causes, including sports.

The Lottery Trust Fund states that 20 percent of lottery proceeds is allocated to the Trust Fund and that sports will receive 20 percent of the Fund’s sectoral allocation.

Why are we not using this mechanism more aggressively and transparently to rebuild grassroots sports? Why are we not creating sustainable facilities instead of endlessly funding short-term participation? Why are we not demanding measurable outcomes from every naira invested?

The United Kingdom provides an instructive lesson – not because the British government simply “funded the Premier League”, as is sometimes suggested, but because football evolved into a powerful commercial ecosystem supported by regulation, investment, broadcasting, infrastructure and private capital.

The Premier League’s revenues grew dramatically from about £170 million in 1991/92 to £5.15 billion in 2018/19, and close to £7 billion in 2024/25.

That is the direction Nigeria should be heading because it is possible for sports to become big business.

Let the NFF president who wants to lead Nigerian football tell the Congress how he intends to raise money to run football without perpetual government spoon-feeding.

In addition, let every candidate publish a five-year commercialisation plan and explain how they will attract sponsors.

How will they grow broadcast revenue? How will they improve match-day revenue? How will they develop licensing and merchandising? Do they even understand the business case of turning sports into a profitable enterprise?

How much revenue can the domestic league generate? Can we make Nigerian football attractive to investors? Can football administrators guarantee transparency? And, above all, how will they spend other people’s money? More questions without answers.

Corporate Nigeria will invest in sports when it sees stability, accountability, transparency and commercial opportunity.

No serious investor wants to enter a dysfunctional system where rules change arbitrarily, accountability is weak and political influence determines outcomes.

Corporate sponsors want to sit at a table with people who understand sports business and how to scale opportunities.

A football model without processes, predictable regulations, audited accounts and measurable returns will not be supported by sponsors as we see in other parts of the world.

Potential corporate sponsors want institutions with safe guards, not personalities. Government must take the back seat always.

This is where the National Sports Commission must demonstrate leadership. Dikko should resist the temptation to become another political centre of gravity in Nigerian sports.

The Commission must not simply replace one form of interference with another. Instead, it should strengthen federations while holding them accountable without government control.

Chairman Dikko, the answer to our challenges in sports is good governance, transparency and accountability, which we can also describe as “responsible stewardship”.

All the contending forces and political factions aiming for the nation’s football Glass House in order to take over the NFF should show us their plans for institutional reforms.

Meanwhile, let me repeat myself: government should only provide the seed money, infrastructure and enabling environment for sports to develop and thrive in Nigeria, and then back off.

If the environment is right, private capital will come. If the rules are clear, sponsors will come, and if accounts are transparent, investors will come.

It is also evident that if the leagues are properly organised, broadcasters will show interest, just as fans will return when the competitions are credible.

This is because our passion for sports, especially football, has turned into a huge movement of friends and fans.

Then, of course, the money will follow. It is not rocket science. Nigeria does not lack talent – what we lack are systems and the institutional confidence to unlock commercial opportunities.

The current football crisis is therefore bigger than Gusau and Dikko. It is also bigger than the NFF. It is a crisis of a model that has failed and that is the reform Nigeria needs.