Prof Hassan A. Saliu
Abstract
This paper examines the evolving perception and treatment of Nigerians in the diaspora in recent times. It argues that the shift from admiration to hostility is linked to Nigeria’s domestic economic decline, increased migration following the Structural Adjustment Programme, and the conduct of a minority within the diaspora. The paper assesses state response mechanisms and the role of diplomatic missions, and proposes domestic reform, proactive diplomacy, and national rebranding as pathways to reverse the trend.
- Introduction: From Admiration to Ambivalence
Nigerian migration, though historically limited, has transformed significantly. In the 1970s, buoyed by petro-dollar wealth, Nigerians abroad were largely regarded as symbols of a prosperous emerging state. However, with the advent of economic crisis and the Structural Adjustment Programme of the mid-1980s, migration became mass-driven and survivalist.
This shift coincided with increased reports of xenophobia and hostility towards Nigerians in destinations across America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. The repeated quit notices issued to Nigerians living in Ghana and the resurgence of anti-Nigerian rhetoric in other countries warrant this short intervention.
- Conceptual and Historical Context
The literature on migration and national image suggests a direct correlation between a state’s domestic performance and the status of its citizens abroad. The Nigerian experience fits this framework. The oil boom era projected an image of affluence, while the subsequent economic downturn projected an image of desperation. Consequently, what was once diplomatic goodwill has, in several contexts, given way to suspicion and policy backlash.
- Drivers of Hostility
Eleven broad factors account for the phenomenon:
- Push Factors: Economic pressure, unemployment, and insecurity that compel emigration.
- Conduct Factors: Allegations of criminality, fraud, and non-compliance with host-country laws by a segment of the diaspora.
- Perception Factors: Media amplification and stereotyping that conflate the actions of a few with the identity of the many.
- Migration Myths: Glorified narratives of “greener pastures” encourage youth to migrate without adequate information. Some, out of desperation, resort to means that breach civility and legality.
- Role of Unscrupulous Agents: Human trafficking cartels lure Nigerians with false promises, only to abandon them after recouping expenses. This produces a class of desperate migrants prone to law-breaking.
- Weak State Response: Nigerian missions are often overwhelmed by high consular demand. Paucity of funds and gaps in due diligence limit their capacity to protect citizens effectively.
- Language and Legal Barriers: Desperation often leads migrants to countries where they neither understand the language nor the laws, increasing the likelihood of infractions.
- Fragility of the Nigerian State: The diminished global image of Nigeria, shaped by domestic insecurity and governance deficits, rationalizes hostility in host countries.
- Overzealousness of Security Operatives: In some host states, security agencies profile Nigerians indiscriminately. In other cases, nationals of other African countries are misrepresented as Nigerians, further damaging Nigeria’s image.
- Unhealthy Business Rivalry: Driven away from home by economic factors, Nigerian emigrants often enter any business that will generate income to survive in foreign lands. This sometimes breeds envy and, coupled with a lack of due diligence, makes them targets for local interests. Failure to keep proper records with Nigeria’s embassies has also hamstrung them in seeking initial consular intervention.
- Flamboyant Lifestyle: Nigerians in other parts of the world, especially in Africa, are generally perceived as big spenders on goods and services. This instantly exposes them to envy. Locals who have not found their footing often blame Nigerians residing in or visiting their countries for economic downturns. During periods of unrest, they are frequently targeted.
4. State Response and Diplomatic Capacity: An Assessment
The Nigerian state has responded through consular intervention, economic diplomacy, legal representation, and periodic presidential engagement with diaspora communities. However, these measures remain limited in effectiveness.
Five critical gaps persist:
- Inadequate Intervention: Missions sometimes limit themselves to counselling and occasional prison visits. In many cases, citizens are left to navigate judicial processes alone, or missions inadvertently echo host-country narratives.
- Defensive Posturing: A recurring critique is that some diplomatic officials adopt positions that mirror host-nation narratives, rather than robustly defending the totality of Nigeria’s interests.
- Retaliatory Tendencies: On some occasions, the Nigerian state has reacted by reciprocating negative gestures against host states, rather than pursuing diplomatic redress for citizens.
- Limits of Bilateral Mechanisms: Platforms such as the Nigeria-South Africa Bi-National Commission were created to address xenophobia. The persistence of attacks suggests these mechanisms have not yielded the desired outcomes.
- Slowness in Evacuation: The trend over the years has been sluggish evacuation of citizens during periods of upheaval. This was evident in Libya under Gaddafi, when over forty undocumented Nigerians were killed due to delays in state evacuation.
The capacity of missions — in terms of funding, staffing, and strategic orientation — must therefore be interrogated.
- Diaspora Agency and Image Management
While many Nigerians abroad are distinguished in academia, medicine, technology, and business, the negative actions of a minority continue to shape collective perception. This underscores the need for diaspora associations to manage their image deliberately, promote ethical conduct, and project positive national values.
- Towards a Four-pronged Way Forward
Reversing the wave of hostility requires a coordinated approach:
- Domestic Reform: Addressing poverty, unemployment, and insecurity to ensure migration is aspirational rather than forced.
- Proactive Diplomacy: Repositioning missions as institutions for citizen protection, legal support, rapid response, and national branding.
- National Rebranding: A state-diaspora partnership to project a narrative of innovation, industry, and integrity.
- Enhancing the Place of Foreign Policy in Governance: The Nigerian state needs to place more emphasis on external relations through careful planning, anticipatory action, and adequate budgeting. The international system has undergone momentous changes, and the kits largely developed under Balewa are proving inadequate to confront current realities.
7. Conclusion
The hostility towards Nigerians abroad is symptomatic of deeper domestic challenges. As history shows, respect abroad mirrors respect at home. The dignity accorded to Nigerians in the diaspora will ultimately depend on the institutional and economic dignity restored to Nigeria itself. Reversing this trend is not inevitable, but it is achievable through deliberate policy and collective action.
The author is of the Department of Political Science, University of Ilorin
