But this indifference exhibited by the League only served as an impetus to other powerful countries to toe similar path. For example, it was not until after this that Hitler continued with his expansionist moves which ultimately culminated in the collapse of the League and consequently, igniting the Second World War. Bearing this scenario in mind, the need for the reform of the UN could not have come at a better time if only to avert the impending possibility of the organisation going the way of the League of Nations and increasing international tension, suspicion, distrust, insecurity and possibly a Third World War which the world may not survive in view of the mass proliferation of nuclear weapons across continents. The need for the UN reforms is even more pronounced, in realisation of the fact that some of the present permanent members of the council as presently constituted have outlived their usefulness. For example, the imperatives that ensured permanent seats for countries like France and Britain which in any case has, over the years become the 51st state of the US, no longer exist let alone a disintegrated USSR! Isn’t it a fact that based on contemporary realities, Germany and Japan could lay more credible claim to the Permanent seat of UN Security Council than any of the diminishing trio at least in consideration of their strong economic base and clout in international relations and politics? The quest for a fairer regional representation in the council could also never have come at a better time.

It is quite significant that in the light of their enormous contributions to world economy, the African continent and the Middle East countries definitely deserve permanent representation in the council.

There is therefore no wondering why the African Union (AU) favours the Option A of the reforms which provides for a 24-member Security Council as against the present 14 and the creation of six new permanent seats two of which are to be allotted to Africa. In this piece however, the focus will be on the chances of Nigeria in clinching the permanent seat especially in the light of the keen challenge it is facing from at least two other major contenders from the continent i.e. Egypt and South Africa. In doing this, the piece shall highlight some of Nigeria’s strong points and weaknesses in the contest which has since began in earnest. One of the major strong points of Nigeria in its quest for the permanent seat of UN Security Council is its leadership role in the continental politics. It is a well-known fact that over the years, Nigeria’s foreign policy has consistently been Afro-centric in nature.

This is based on the belief that the security well-being of the country is more or less hinged on the security and material wellbeing of its poor neighbours. This is in recognition of the sad events of the Nigerian civil war in which some powerful enemies of Nigeria took advantage of its poor neighbours to support the rebellion in Nigeria by using their territories and waterways. Since, this experience, Nigeria has attached so much premium not only to the promotion and defence of its neighbours’ socio-economic and security interests, but also defending the dignity of the black race the world over. In this regard, and in its tireless effort of wiping out colonialism and white minority rule in the continent, Nigeria has been in congruence with the cardinal principles and objectives which the United Nations stands for. Towards this end, the country has made significant contributions to the attainment of independence of African countries such as Angola and Zimbabwe and also played dominant roles in the struggle against apartheid and white minority rule in South Africa which not only saw to the achievement of independence of those countries but also led to the establishment of multi-racial government in South Africa. Furthermore, Nigeria has over the years, participated in various peace keeping operations in war-torn African countries and beyond under the umbrellas of various multilateral organisations such as the UN, OAU and ECOWAS. The human and financial commitments to such noble ventures is unrivalled by any other country in the continent. Moreover, over the last six years, Nigeria has distinguished itself as a promoter and defender of democratic ideals in the continent. The country has played a commendable role in not only ensuring the reversal of the military coup in Sierra-Leone but also ensuring that the legitimate government of Ahmed Tejan Kabba was restored to power. Also, when the military establishment struck in Sao-Tome and Principe, Nigeria was seen at the forefront condemning the action and ensuring the restoration of democratic order in the country.

Nigeria has also recently played a significant role in quashing the obnoxious precedent that was about to be set in Togo when the late President Gnassingbe Eyadema died and the military guys, in glaring contravention of constitutional provisions, installed his son as the successor. Added to the fact that Nigeria itself is now a democracy in spite of a long history of militocracy, the country’s interventions in these three African countries represent quite an impeccable credential for the country as an emerging vanguard for democracy and rule of law in the continent. The question of debt overhang which has continued to be a major nightmare of most third world countries particularly African countries has also been assiduously tackled by the country over the last six years. Nigeria has spearheaded the campaign for debt relief and or outright cancellation with all the vociferousness it could muster. The campaign has been effectively carried to the doorsteps of the western creditor nations and their institutions like the Paris and London clubs. Recently, such efforts have started yielding positive results at least with the decision of the European Union to forgive the debt of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) of which African countries are in the majority. Even though Nigeria itself is yet to directly benefit from the concessions, the indirect benefit that accrues to it from this is the reaffirmation of its leadership clout in the continent since the credit for the realised concessions largely goes to it. On the other hand, if the words of the World Bank governor Paul Wolfowitz are anything to go by, in the foreseeable future, the country’s $34b debt profile might be reduced to a mere $6b. If this materializes, it will amount to killing two birds with one stone. Furthermore, Nigeria’s concerted efforts in making a case for African emancipation from the shackles of poverty, illiteracy, and underdevelopment at world level has began to yield some positive results. For example, the recent establishment of the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which are geared towards halving the poverty level in Africa by the year 2015 is a case in point. Also, the establishment of the African Commission by the British Government to address the development question in Africa is largely attributed to this. Whether these initiatives, workout in the end or not, the fact remains that with a megaphone like Nigeria in the Security Council of the United Nations new grounds shall be broken that will pave way for sustainable growth and development in Africa.

The structure of Nigeria’s domestic political economy is also a point of reference when considering the possibility of its clinching the much coveted seat. A careful study of the composition of the country’s economy would reveal that it is a potentially great one with abundant natural resources, arable land, good climatic conditions, strategic location in the continent, etc. Also the country’s large population is a plus for it since it is the single most populated country in the continent. If China could clinch the seat largely on account of its population in its region, Nigeria also qualifies on same ground.

Consequent upon the country’s large population, it has consistently served as the largest market in Africa and also constitutes a formidable military power in the region. Having considered some of the strong points that will work in favour of Nigeria as far the quest for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council is concerned, it will not be out of place to consider some of our major shortcomings. Along this line, the first major setback against Nigeria is its inability over the years, to match its resounding foreign policy track record with an enduring and impeccable domestic policy that is diligently followed to the letter. It is a fact that Nigeria’s domestic policies have been characterized by gross inconsistencies in the form of lack of continuity and in majority of cases half-hearted commitment to the execution of the formulated policies. Scholars of international relations and politics often posit that there is a direct relationship between the realisation of a country’s foreign policy objectives and its domestic policies. In order words, the realisation of a country’s foreign policy objectives is a function of proper execution of its domestic policies. This explains why Nigeria has failed to get maximum benefits from its foreign policy engagements over the years. This point could be lucidly demonstrated by using the character of President Obasanjo’s foreign policy stance in the last six years which centres on reconciling Nigeria with the international community, particularly, the western world; partly because of the bad image it suffers from successive years of military rule and particularly because of Late General Abacha’s antagonistic posture towards the western world which, in the recent past, even saw the country being expelled from the Commonwealth of Nations. The administration has not only been able to commendably reconcile and reintegrate Nigeria into the world community but also established friendly relations with the western world. But six years after all these overtures and fence-mending, the administration has failed to realise its objective of attracting Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) into the country in spite of President Obasanjo’s personally taking the campaigns to world capitals. This is mainly the result of the government’s failure to effectively pursue domestic policies and squarely address the country’s internal problems with the deserved dexterity. For example, one of the earliest promises of this administration was that of ensuring the overhaul of the power and energy sector of the Nigerian economy. The sad story is that up till today, the government has not being able to fulfil this promise as power and energy supply remains epileptic which serves as a gross disincentive to production, commerce and investment. Also, the government’s gross failure to address the question of increasing impoverishment, malnutrition, hunger, and other deprivations in the midst of abundance as well as its blatant neglect of social sector services particularly education and health under the guise of economic reforms, has continued to elicit mass disenchantment of Nigerian masses for as the saying goes, “a hungry man is an angry man.” Even though this might be considered as a cliché, the import of its moral must not be lost on us. Thus, the recurrent ethno-religious conflagrations that have almost become a permanent feature of our polity in the last six years could well be explained along these lines. Therefore, so long as conscious effort is not been made by the government to address the question of poverty and collapse of social institutions, it will be difficult to tame the monsters of corruption, ethno-religious uprisings, sabotage and vandalisation of government properties among many other unpleasant happenings that continue to cast the nation in bad light over the years. The overall implication of this is that it makes it difficult for any sane foreign investor to come and invest in the country in spite of whatever diplomatic white wash that would be engaged in by the government. This is particularly true when viewed within the context of the information technology revolution which has turned the whole wide world into a small global village in which happenings in one country cannot be hidden from the knowledge of other countries; certainly not with the wide network of satellite televisions, internet technology, powerful international radio and newspaper outfits with universal coverage, etc. Furthermore, the level of political immaturity in our polity displayed through brazen arrogance of power and other shameful acts that are at variance with democratic norms could be another major undoing of our international exploits. The Anambra crisis is a point of reference when discussing the extent of the degeneracy of our political culture, immaturity, selfishness and greed. A situation whereby a sitting governor is abducted and forced to resign with the active connivance of the police who is supposed to be the defender of democratic institutions and ideals is unheard of in any civilised society. The situation becomes more lamentable in the light of government’s failure to take stern measures against the perpetrators of the dastardly act. In consideration of some of the gross impediments to our quest for development and hindrances to international prominence, it is recommended that the present and indeed subsequent administrations in this country should concentrate in instilling fiscal discipline and consistency in domestic policy formulation, execution and assessment without any imaginary attachment to the dictates of contemporary globalists. Recent initiatives by the present administration in the area of economic and financial crime fighting through the EFCC, the war against corruption through the ICPC, the drug fight through NAFDAC as well as the due process initiatives are commendable. Intensification of these strides will definitely yield more positive results in terms of better international image and positive internal growth and development for the country. It is also recommended that the government treads softly, the path of its adopted foreign-induced economic reforms. This is because experience has shown that sustainable development comes from within a polity through deliberate, sincere and sustained creation of institutions and structures that will augment developmental efforts than by relying on the dictates of IMF and World Bank. We must learn lessons from the experiences of some African countries who suffered the extreme devastating consequences of holding on to such policies. For example, today Somalia is a failed state because of its implementation of the Bretton Woods Institutions’ (BWIs) recommended structural adjustment programmes.

Also the Rwandan genocide of 1994 which is unprecedented in human history, culminated from the country’s embracement of such programmes after the price of coffee, its major revenue earner, crashed in the international market.

Also, bearing in mind, the experiences of the so-called Asian tigers especially since the post-cold war abandonment syndrome sets in, it is glaring that sustainable development always results from conscious homegrown initiatives as against reliance on handouts and concessions from metropolitan powers and blatant disregard for the sufferings of the masses in the domestic front occasioned by the policies recommended by them. The right model to adopt in this regard should be the Japanese model who, after suffering the worst damage in the Second World War, today emerges as major world economic power whose thriving economy is threatening to outdo the ageing economies of the US and Britain put together. It achieves this feat largely through putting its house in order and pursuing vigorous human resources development initiatives as well as effective exploration of domestic potentialities. It is also recommended that the Nigerian authorities should, rather than pursuing diligently, the polices of deregulation and less government intervention in economic affairs, take a cue from President Roosevelt’s (1933-1936) programme of action titled “The New Deal.” According to Professor Sam Aluko in his work entitled “The Economic and Political Failure of Globalisation in Africa”, “when faced with a depressed and oppressed economy, he (Roosevelt) used the powers of the American government to upstart and reinvigorate the tottering economy of the USA. When he became the President of the United States in March, 1933, the economy of the USA was in shambles; the financial system was disintegrating; industrial and agricultural production had collapsed, about 13 million unemployed US workers (constituting about 25% of the labour force) were wandering around, homeless, hungry and starving (in Africa, today, such army of the unemployed are either fighting, rebelling, terrorizing, or starving).” He went on, “In a program which he labelled the "New Deal", Roosevelt put in place measures to improve agriculture and industry, grant debt relief to farmers and private households and the needy and, in a planned manner, ensured that the government strictly supervised banking, credits and investments by ending speculation with people's money. That is, under government control, he ensured a disciplined attack on the economic problems of the USA. In the "New Deal", the US government issued credit to finance public works and large-scale infrastructural projects. In the rural areas electrified-canals, tunnels, bridges, highways, streets, sewage systems, houses, hospitals, schools, universities, multi-purpose dams, power plants, fertilizer factories, and flood control docks were built”.