In my previous article, “Tinubu’s Twin Salvos on Northern Nigeria” (published on December 2, 2024), I warned about the dangers of Nigeria’s foreign policy under President Bola Tinubu, particularly his engagement with France. The recent mineral development deal signed between Nigeria and France exemplifies the concerns I raised. While the agreement promises economic benefits, it also carries significant risks that threaten Nigeria’s sovereignty and stability, especially in the northern regions bordering Niger and Chad. These risks are already starting to unfold.
What remains most troubling, however, is the fact that the full details of this deal have yet to be disclosed to the Nigerian public. In a democratic society, transparency is paramount, especially when agreements of such importance are made. The lack of public insight into the specifics of the deal raises serious concerns about the true nature of the relationship being fostered between Nigeria and France, as well as the potential consequences of this partnership.
The term Francafrique refers to France’s political, military, and economic dominance in its former African colonies. Despite claims of reform, France’s actions often reveal a continuation of neocolonial practices. France’s interventions in Africa, particularly in the Sahel, have been framed as efforts to combat terrorism but often lead to greater instability and local resentment.
This history has made many African nations cautious about French involvement. France’s military presence in the region has been contentious, with its actions increasingly contributing to instability. As a result, countries like Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, and Niger have expelled French forces and severed diplomatic ties. For Nigeria, forming a partnership with France could lead to greater entanglement with a power whose past actions in Africa have fueled instability, despite the potential economic benefits being offered.
The mineral deal between Nigeria and France could provide economic opportunities, but it also risks deepening Nigeria’s political and military ties with a country that has a complex and often damaging history in Africa. France’s continued military presence in the Sahel, especially under the guise of security cooperation, has exacerbated local conflicts and created power vacuums that extremist groups have exploited.
The recent tensions between Nigeria and Niger highlight the delicate balance in the region. Relations between Nigeria and its northern neighbor have soured, particularly after accusations from Niger’s foreign minister that Nigeria served as a base for destabilizing Niger. This tension was sparked by the December 13 attack on the Niger-Benin oil pipeline in Gaya, Niger, an incident for which Nigeria has denied any involvement. Kimiebi Ebienfa, spokesperson for Nigeria’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, firmly rejected any connection between Nigeria and the Lakurawa terrorist group or any collaboration by Nigerian security forces. Despite this denial, the tensions between the two countries have been exacerbated by President Tinubu’s cooperation with France, a Western power already accused of complicity in supporting regional terrorism in West Africa.
Since Niger’s military coup in 2023 and its subsequent withdrawal from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), relations between the two countries have deteriorated, with Nigerian support for France worsening the rift. France’s military presence in the region has been increasingly viewed as a destabilizing factor, and these concerns are now directly impacting Nigeria’s foreign relations and security landscape. The prospect of deeper ties with France may entrench Nigeria further in regional conflicts that it is ill-equipped to manage.
Nigeria, especially its northern regions, is vulnerable to the spillover effects of instability in neighboring countries. The risk of being drawn into a military alliance with France, even under the guise of counterterrorism efforts, could further compromise Nigeria’s sovereignty. It could also alienate Nigeria from its neighbors and heighten security challenges in the northern states, which are already dealing with extremist groups and insurgencies.
President Tinubu must carefully assess the long-term implications of his engagement with France. The economic benefits of the deal may seem appealing, but the risks associated with deeper military and political involvement are high. Nigeria must not sacrifice its sovereignty or security for short-term gains or personal political ambitions.
Northern Nigerian leaders, particularly those from states bordering Niger and Chad, must remain vigilant. The region’s proximity to unstable areas makes it especially sensitive to foreign military involvement. Northern leaders should ensure that any foreign agreements prioritize national interests over external alliances that could bring foreign military forces into Nigeria. Given the region’s fragile security situation, any agreement that opens the door to foreign military presence is a potential catalyst for further destabilization.
France’s military interventions in Africa have often been framed as part of efforts to combat terrorism, but the results have frequently been counterproductive. In countries like Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, French military presence has fueled local resentment and exacerbated instability, creating a breeding ground for extremist activity.
The risk of similar outcomes in Nigeria is real. If the Nigerian government allows greater French military involvement under the pretext of security cooperation, it could trigger a new wave of instability, particularly in the northern regions. French troops, regardless of their stated mission, could spark local opposition and exacerbate existing security challenges. History has shown that foreign military involvement, especially by powers with a history of intervention like France, often leads to unintended consequences that worsen the very problems they were supposed to solve.
Northern Nigerian leaders have a vital role to play in holding the federal government accountable and ensuring that any foreign agreements do not compromise the region’s stability. The northern region, with its proximity to volatile countries like Niger and Chad, must remain a priority in Nigeria’s foreign policy decisions.
Leaders from the north must advocate for Nigeria’s sovereignty and oppose any agreements that would lead to foreign military entanglements. The risk of being drawn into France’s ongoing efforts of military comeback in the Sahel could destabilize the region even further, and the people of northern Nigeria should not be made to bear the consequences of foreign interference.
The mineral deal between President Tinubu and France is fraught with risks. While the agreement may offer short-term economic benefits, it could also lead to deeper foreign involvement in Nigeria’s affairs, particularly in its northern regions. The full details of the deal have not been disclosed to the Nigerian public, raising serious concerns about the transparency of the agreement and its potential implications. France’s history of destabilization and intervention in Africa must serve as a cautionary tale for President Tinubu. Nigeria must avoid sacrificing its sovereignty and security for short-term political or economic gains.
Northern Nigerian leaders must continue to hold the federal government accountable and ensure that any foreign deals prioritize Nigeria’s national interests over external alliances. The risks of foreign military entanglement are too high, and Nigeria must be careful not to become another pawn in a broader geopolitical game that could jeopardize its future stability.
