SECTION 39: Now that we've got it....

... What are we going to do with it? “It” being a seat on the Security Council of the United Nations. Although we were actually returned unopposed along with the other new members, the campaign for the seat was presented as the next-to-last struggle to end all struggles; the penultimate accolade by which Nigeria’s position as an international top dog would be recognised.

The ultimate step of course, would be a permanent seat on the Security Council. But even if we got that, what would we do with it?

To some extent the answer is going to be determined by how we perform during our present two-year stint on the Council.

It is commonly agreed that three countries are in the running to occupy any permanent seat for Africa if the Security Council is reformed: Egypt, South Africa and Nigeria.

But however conveniently the appointment of Egypt would “tick two boxes” (Africa and the Middle East) most of sub-Saharan Africa would consider itself short-changed and unrepresented if that country were to be appointed.

South Africa completed a two-year stint on the Security Council at the end of last year.

During that time it dismayed human rights activists by blocking votes on Zimbabwe and Myanmar, as well as opposing the Council’s support for Kosovo’s declaration of independence, and angered the Western members of the Permanent Five by refusing to support sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme; this stance won it support within Africa in particular, and amongst developing nations in general. South Africa insisted that it was not supporting human rights abuses, but that the Security Council, which had been unable to discuss Guantanamo or Gaza, could not be the correct place to discuss abuses in Zimbabwe and Myanmar.

Whether South Africa failed to adequately present Africa’s position on these issues in a coherent and support-attracting way, or whether the positions taken by Africa were unlikely to attract support no matter how beautifully or diplomatically packaged, it is important for Nigeria to learn from South Africa’s time on the Council as it prepares for its own two years there, particularly if we hope to make the kind of impression that will linger when the question of a permanent seat for Africa comes up for consideration. Although it has been suggested that Nigeria and South Africa might consider reaching some agreement on sharing Africa’s seat between them, Nigeria needs to prepare for the situation that will exist if such a novel proposal fails to gain traction.

In short, Nigeria needs to go into the Security Council with clear objectives, coherent strategies and effective tools.

It will not be enough to simply repeat the mantra that “Africa is the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy”, as our leaders are fond of doing, without clearly articulating what that means. Nigeria must be ready to not only represent African policy to the world, but must also be active in shaping that policy. Abandoning the continent’s crises in Sudan, Somalia, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea or Zimbabwe, to the agenda of Muammar Ghadaffi in Libya, or for that matter, Saudi Arabia, France, the United States of America, the United Kingdom or any other country, will not achieve the desired results.

Instead, Nigeria must work to shape the continent’s response to these issues through the African Union, or sub-regional bodies: not solely the Economic Community of West African States, but also through diplomatic representations, listening to and influencing the policies adopted by sub-regional bodies that we are not members of, such as the Intergovernmental Agency on Development in the Horn of Africa, the International Conference of the Great Lakes or the Southern African Development Community.

In this connection, the dissatisfaction recently expressed by the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs with the lack of direction in the nation’s foreign policy, and the quality of its formulation by the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, is timely.

In addition, if we are to develop coherent strategies and deploy our best tools, we need to review the quality of representation at our mission in New York. Nigeria has quality diplomats who understand the UN system.

But have we posted the best of them, who know how to build consensus and carry other nations along, as well as make our case to influential civil society actors, to New York? Or is our mission staffed by people whose main qualification is that they ‘know people’?

The clumsy inability of the powers-that-be in Abuja to get the message - two years running (!) - that you cannot simply substitute a foreign minister for a head of state at the last minute during the General Assembly, suggests that we need to raise our game considerably, not just as to seasoned diplomats, but also as to efficient administrators, so that the public relations disaster that characterises some of our consular services will be made a thing of the past.

Nigeria can make a success of its membership of the Security Council. This column has often quoted (with approval) Woody Allen’s observation that 90% of life is about “just showing up”.

But having reached the point where we have shown up, Nigeria in the Security Council needs to remember that the other 10% ... is about what you do once you get there.