As president Bola Tinubu moves to appoint ambassadors to Nigeria’s foreign missions worldwide after months of diplomatic gaps and growing pressure over the country’s absence of envoys abroad, stakeholders have proffered qualities required by the occupants so as to engender robust foreign policy directions and bring back the country into reckoning.
TInubu, had in September 2023, recalled all ambassadors from Nigeria’s 109 foreign missions — comprising 76 embassies, 22 high commissions, and 11 consulates — as part of a “comprehensive diplomatic review
For over two years, nothing has been done due to what the president admitted as the complexity of balancing political and professional interests in the appointments.
“It’s not easy stitching those names,” Tinubu told members of The Buhari Organisation, led by former Nasarawa State Governor, Senator Tanko Al-Makura, who visited him at the State House on September 2, 2025.
But recent diplomatic tension following comments by former U.S. President Donald Trump, who threatened military intervention in Nigeria over alleged killings of Christians, may have jolted the presidency, prompting hasty decision to clean up the list for the eventual postings.
Trump, in a post on his social media platform, announced that he was labelling Nigeria a “Country of Particular Concern.”
He later claimed to have instructed congressional Republicans to investigate the matter and report back to him.
On Saturday, Trump said he had ordered the U.S. Department of War to “prepare for possible action” in Nigeria over the alleged killings.
He wrote, “If the Nigerian Government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the U.S.A. will immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria, and may very well go into that disgraced country, ‘guns-a-blazing,’ to wipe out the Islamic terrorists committing these atrocities.”
While most Nigerians agree that the lack of ambassadors may not necessarily be responsible for the escalation of the recent issues with the United States, it was unanimously agreed that their presence could have made communication smoother, as the claim is that foreign partners prefer to engage at the ambassadorial level, “especially in moments of crisis or negotiation, for which they are holding the presidency for ineptitude.
Although most respondents, who spoke to metrobusinessnews.com (MBN) in confidence admitted not knowing the likely individuals that would occupy the highly esteemed positions as ambassadors, they were unanimous in their submission that career diplomat should be appointed, to save the country from the present embarrassments, ocassioned by diplomatic blunders
Kesters Onor, research fellow at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs posited that people with requisite exposure and experience as diplonat should be appointed, particularly to some important and sensitive countries, like the US and the European countries.
Friday Ameh, Lagos based analyst, while advising the president to look beyond party considerations and affiliations, noted that the absence of ambassadors in the last two years may have exposed Nigeria’s diplomatic vacuum, which has manifested in the current diplomatic roll with US, as there is no ambassador in Washington to engage directly with US authorities.
“There is no authoritative figure to speak for Nigeria in Washington, hence we were all subjected to information through the social media,” Ameh said.
Adding, he said, “Without an ambassador, even the most serious diplomatic outreach becomes bureaucratic and slow. It weakens Nigeria’s ability to defend itself.”
Another analyst said that although most Nigerians may not know the identities of some of them presently as everything is still on the realm of speculation, he admonished president Tinubu to muster enough political will to delete some names mentioned on the previous list that was leaked to the public, as not fit for such appointments.
READ ALSO:Trump’s Military Threat: We Are In Trouble – Falana
But, Cheta Nwanze, a partner at SBM Intelligence, in his published article,
“Nigeria’s ‘Country of Particular Concern’ designation was years in the making”, observed that the action by Trump did not come to most Nigerians by surprise, yet, the inevitable consequence still caught the leadership completely off balance, exposing a profound crisis in Abuja’s foreign policy apparatus.
“This crisis marks a collapse from a position of principled assertion to one of outright denial, diplomatic ineptitude, and a fundamental failure of the Nigerian security state. The CPC sanction is not merely a diplomatic rebuke; it is a stark indictment of a political elite fatally separated from the existential security crisis plaguing its citizenry”, he said.
Noting, what he calls, the dramatic fall of the country from grace, he said it can best be understood by contrasting the current administration’s failed response with the strategic, proactive diplomacy of two former eras of golden generation in the 1970s and early 1980s, which built a formidable international reputation on the foundation of Africa as the “centrepiece” of its foreign policy, with diplomats like Emeka Anyaoku, Jaja Wachuku, Leslie Harriman, and B.A. Clark, who were not merely skilled negotiators; they were representatives of a state projecting political cohesion and economic purpose.
There was also the generation that followed, spanning the mid-1980s through the early 2000s, which, according to him, retained significant intellectual capacity but operated under increasing political pressure.
Figures such as Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, with his visionary but ultimately constrained idea of a Concert of Medium Powers, and highly successful multilateralists like Professor Ibrahim Gambari, Ignatius Olisaemeka and Dr Joy Ogwu, who recently passed away, were technically world-class.
The current crisis, he further argues, exemplified by the CPC designation, demonstrates a complete breakdown in both strategic foresight and diplomatic response, proving a distinct failure when measured against the standards of the two preceding eras. This failure is twofold.
First, there is the catastrophic failure of the security state. The US action was not an arbitrary diplomatic move; it was a judgement on the fundamental inability of Nigerian security forces to protect all its citizens from persistent, bloody sectarian and communal violence. .
Also, he said the second is the failure of diplomacy itself, where propaganda has been chosen over proactivity. In the face of months of clear warnings, the Nigerian government’s response was reported to be one of political denial rather than proactive, strategic engagement. There was a conspicuous absence of high-level, pre-emptive diplomacy designed to secure the nation’s interests.
On the previous leaked ambassadorial list, Nwanze wrote, “The situation is further complicated by the reported nomination of politically polarising figures for ambassadorial roles, which confirms the extent to which diplomatic posts are viewed as political rewards rather than tools of statecraft.
The case of Reno Omokri, a former presidential aide, illustrates a profound self-contradiction. Omokri gained significant global visibility for founding the #FreeLeahSharibu movement, advocating fiercely for the Christian schoolgirl kidnapped by Boko Haram. He was previously a vocal critic of the government’s perceived inaction on insecurity and human rights abuses.
However, upon being associated with the current administration, his energy has been redirected toward defending the government and downplaying the very religious persecution that underpins the CPC sanction. This pivot—from being a chief global champion of persecuted Christians to becoming a defender of a state being sanctioned over that same persecution—erodes Nigeria’s credibility and underscores a diplomatic apparatus devoid of strategic consistency.
Similarly, the reported nominations of Femi Fani-Kayode, Okezie Ikpeazu and Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi highlights the perceived primacy of political loyalty over diplomatic suitability. Fani-Kayode’s public profile is dominated by a history of controversial and inflammatory political rhetoric, frequent party-switching, and high-profile legal battles. Diplomacy demands tact, restraint, and an unblemished public image.
Appointing a figure who has been widely criticised for verbally abusing a journalist and engaging in highly polarising debates sends a clear message that the administration prioritises political reward above the global reputation and diplomatic efficacy of the country.
The “Golden Generation” of Nigerian diplomats operated under the confidence of a politically cohesive and purposeful state. Their successors maintained technical brilliance but were politically fettered. The current epoch is marked by the worst of both worlds: a catastrophic security state failure and a diplomatic vacuum filled by political expediency. The prolonged absence of strategic foresight, the reliance on denial over engagement, and the nomination of controversial envoys all confirm the international suspicion that Nigeria is not serious about addressing the very issues of insecurity and religious persecution that led to the CPC sanction.”
According to sources, the presidency is aware of the misgivings and negative perceptions of some alleged nominees to the ambassadorial list, adding, Nigerians are waiting with bated breath, the quality of people appointed by Tinubu and cleared by the security agencies and the National Assembly to represent Nigeria abroad.
