...says military intervention not declaration for war

The Commission of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Commission) has reiterated the resolve of the regional body to engage military force in restoring the ousted democratically elected President of the Republic of Niger, Mohamed Bazoum to power.

The President of the Commission, Dr. Omar A. Touray, who spoke Friday at a media briefing to clarify the position of ECOWAS in Niger crises, expressed worries that military intervention was fast creeping back into Africa and that it was time to end the contagion.

President Touray assured the people of Niger that the regional body was concerned about their welfare as it worked towards restoring civilian rule and political stability in the country.

The military junta had on July 27, sacked the democratically elected President of the Republic of Niger, Mohamed Bazoum, over alleged poverty and impoverishment of the masses. Although the people took to the streets to welcome the military intervention, ECOWAS leadership handed down a seven-day ultimatum to the junta within which to reinstate the ousted Bazoum or risk intervention of whatever form.

At the expiration of the seven days, ECOWAS Authority of Heads of State and Government began a process of finding a peaceful resolution to the impasse amidst calls by various stakeholders to thread with caution so as not to further escalate violence in the region.

But President Touray felt that the current development in the Republic of Niger has added to the list of attempted coups d’état in the region, the reason Heads of State and Government decided that “this is one coup too many and resolved that it was time to end the contagion.”

He added that the situation in Niger was particularly unfortunate as it came at a time the country was doing comparatively well in terms of security and economic growth.

Justifying the planned deployment of military force to reinstate Bazoum, Touray tasked those challenging the legality of the decision of ECOWAS Heads of State need to do more research on the issue.

He frowned that in spite of numerous provisions against military government and sanctions provided in the various articles and chatters in the region, the decision to deploy military against the junta has been taken out of context and repeatedly misrepresented in the media as a declaration of war against Niger Republic or a planned invasion of the country.

“It is even tragic that some influential persons in the community have promoted this narrative which has been hyped in the social media as the gospel truth. These persons have conveniently ignored the strenuous efforts of the community to engage with the junta to reverse the attempted coup.

“For the avoidance of doubt, let me state unequivocally that ECOWAS has neither declared war on the people of Niger nor is there a plan, as it is being purported, to ‘invade’ the country.

“The ECOWAS Authority of Heads of State and Government has only activated a full scale application of sanctions which includes the use of legitimate force to restore constitutional order. Never has ECOWAS indicated it.

“In the interim, the region is employing other elements of its instruments and engaging with the military authorities as can be attested to by the several missions that have been fielded to the country and our joint efforts with our partners, including the African Union and the UN.

“We are hopeful that these diplomatic efforts will yield the desired outcome and make it unnecessary for the deployment of the force. Nonetheless, preparations continue towards making the force ready for deployment.

“Consequently, the technical arms of the decision-making organs, which include the Committee of Chiefs of Defence Staff have also been directed to prepare the community enforcement mechanism in case it becomes compelling to deploy the force.”

Touray added that the decision of the Heads of State and Government to activate the clause providing for the application of legitimate force in Niger was reached only after dialogue failed.

“We are deeply concerned about the wellbeing of the people and the country. Historically, military administrations have not demonstrated any capacity to better deal with complex political, social and security challenges.

“Let me reiterate that the decision of the ECOWAS Authority of Heads of State and Government, which is currently chaired by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, is to work for the peaceful restoration of civilian rule in Niger Republic without any delay and to use all the instruments at the disposal of ECOWAS towards the attainment of this goal.”

News broke out yesterday of an American actress, Halle Berry finalizing divorce with her husband after almost eight years of marriage. From the divorce documents, Halle Berry is to pay her husband $8000 for child and spousal support on a monthly basis; they are both to share joint legal custody of their nine-year-old son. Halle Berry is to take care of every schooling or extracurricular expense of their son. It doesn’t end there, Hale Berry is to pay her ex-husband 4.3% of every one of her earnings that exceeds two million dollars.

Since this news broke, my phone has been buzzing nonstop with messages from folks who want to confirm how legal or how possible it is for the wife to pay the husband child and spousal support at the course of divorce and if it is the same case down here in Nigeria.

Of course, I understand why people are reacting this way to the news and finding it difficult to believe is because what we mostly hear or see is the case of the men paying child and spousal support to the women in the event of divorce.

Well, it is very possible and as a matter of law and practice that in the event of divorce, the woman can pay the man spousal support. What the court looks at is what is fair to each party; the court determines who contributed what and who earned more in the course of the marriage in order to determine who will earn what in the sharing of the wealth. This implies that the court will have to take note of what was acquired during the marriage. The court will consider the individual’s or each partner’s contribution to the marriage and to the acquisition of those properties or money. 

It is important to note that the court will take into consideration not just the economic or financial contribution but also the moral contribution of each of the partners during the marriage. If one partner had to stay at home, take care of home, take care of the children and provide moral support while the other partner works and makes money, the court will equate the other partner’s staying at home to economic contribution and in the event of divorce it will be unfair to leave a partner who spent his or her time taking care of the home and couldn’t find the time to work with nothing because he or she made no financial or economic contributions to the marriage. 

Sometimes it is even an agreement between the partners. The husband always asks their wives to quit their jobs or stop their work and spend time raising their children. It also happens although in rare cases that the partners will agree that the husband should quit his job and spend the time raising the children. It would be grossly unfair to leave a partner with nothing because he made no financial contribution to the marriage when it was the agreement by the partners for one of the partners not to work. 

Therefore, whilst a woman paying spousal and child support to the man is very obtainable and applicable in Nigeria, why it is rare is that you rarely see a stay-at-home dad who has to stay at home, take care of the home while the woman works and make money but if there is any case where this had happened and the man is able to make his case very well the court will definitely order the wife to pay him spousal support. 

Dangote Industries Limited has emerged as Nigeria’s most valuable brand for the sixth consecutive year. This achievement was confirmed by the brand and marketing firm, TOP 50 BRANDS NIGERIA, as part of its comprehensive 2023 Top Brands perception assessment.

Winning the award for a record 6th time confirms the foremost African indigenous Conglomerate’s unwavering dominance of the domestic brand space.

TOP 50 BRANDS NIGERIA, is a qualitative, non-financial evaluation of top corporate brands in the country.  The annual top brands league table which has become like a report card, with which top corporate brands have a feel of their ranking in the market is done with a special purpose model, the Brand Strength Measurement (BSM Index).

The rating firm in a statement said that Dangote got an impressive aggregate score of 86.2 on the Brand Strength Measurement (BSM) index, reinforcing its position at the forefront. The score reflects the consistent excellence of the brand.

MTN remains a strong contender, securing a close second place with an 85 BSM index score. This year's third and fourth positions are secured by Airtel Nigeria and Globacom, both with BSM index scores of 77.9 and 77 respectively. Interestingly, this reaffirms the prominence of telecom brands, with three out of the top four hailing from this sector. Among the Top 10 brands are Access Bank, Zenith Bank, Coca-Cola, GTCO, and First Bank,

Globacom was adjudged the Most Popular Brand following the outcome of a Top of Mind (TOM) Survey, where respondents mentioned 10 brands that came to their mind or that they could easily recall. This year’s survey had as respondents Chief Marketing Officers and Head of Corporate Communications of major companies across the land.

TOP 50 BRANDS NIGERIA announcing the ratings said, "this annual top brand evaluation provides a qualitative, non-financial assessment of the value of leading corporate brands in the country. It gauges consumers' perceptions of brands and their impact on overall brand strength, using the Brand Strength Measurement (BSM) index—a model designed to assess a brand's ability to deliver on its promises from the consumer's perspective."

In today's market, brands have woven themselves into the fabric of our daily lives, from dawn to dusk and even in every consumer choice. This phenomenon is amplified by the rise of concepts like consumer awareness, differentiation, and the dynamics of the global economy, making brands pivotal actors.

Chief Executive Officer of TOP 50 BRANDS NIGERIA Taiwo Oluboyede, speaking on the outcome of this year’s evaluation, likened brand to a person.  He said, “A brand is like a person with all the traits that define his/her personality to the audience. When you hear someone’s name, you are likely not just going to remember their faces or apparel, but who they really are and what they mean to you.”

“Someone may claim to be the best man in the world, and could even go as far as doing paid advertising to attract attention. However, the real description of the person to you is your experience. Perception about a person could change from like to dislike or the other way round, the same is also true for a brand. That is why promoters go the extra length consistently remain in the target audience like-list” he added.

He elaborated that the onus lies with brand owners and promoters to uphold compelling propositions and consistently deliver on promises. "It's not just about making pledges anyway; it's about steadfastly living up to them—a commitment that separates the top brands from the rest," he stated.

A breakdown of the 2023 evaluation report indicated that Nigerian-owned brands continued to shine among the top 10, with 10 brands. These are Dangote, Globacom, Access Bank, Zenith Bank, GTCO, and  First Bank.

Five of the top ten brands are Banks, while three are Telecoms. Impressively, 9 of the 10 were among the top 10 last year, while 4 maintained their previous position. Airtel Nigeria made a remarkable ascent to third place. Also, six brands have consistently maintained top 10 positions for a remarkable 7 years in a row.

Overall, 26 or 52% of the 50 brands are multinational, while 24 or 48% are Nigerian brands.

Rite Foods Limited stands out as the highest gainer this year, leaping 14 places from 46th to 30th. Notably, Wema Bank makes a noteworthy debut in the annual brand ranking. Furthermore, nine brands maintained their 2022 positions, they are Dangote, MTN Nigeria, GTCO, First Bank, Multichoice, Fidelity, Toyota Nigeria, FMNPLC, and AXA Mansard.

A breakdown of the report indicated that Banking Services, as usual, had the largest entries with 12 entrants, representing 24% of the total. Access Bank topped the category. This is followed by Consumer Goods with 9 brands, that is 18%, with Dufil Prima Foods leading the charge.

The Conglomerates category has 6 brands, making up 12%, with Dangote Group on top. The Oil and gas, Beverages, and Telecom sectors each contribute 4 brands, with Oando, Coca-Cola, and MTN leading their respective categories.

The Insurance sector has 3 brands, with AIICO at the forefront. Meanwhile, the Building & Construction Services, Media, and Electronics categories had 2 brands each, featuring Julius Berger, Multichoice, and Tecno Nigeria leading their respective categories.

Automobile, Agricultural, and Aviation/Logistics sectors had 1 brand each —Toyota Nigeria, Olam International, and Air Peace.

Of note in the report also is a class called Brands to Watch, a set of 10 brands that have shown some level of vibrancy in recent times and are gaining momentum in consumer acquisition with the possibility of achieving the 50 top Brands League Table in few years. It should be noted that, while these brands have considerable mentions in the TOM survey, they were not strictly subjected to the rigorous BSM evaluation.

The federal government has said it is working assiduously to ensure that all the country’s refineries are fixed in order to end importation of fuel as well as stop flaring of gas in the country in next few years.

The Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Senator Heineken Lokpobiri, disclosed this on Thursday while speaking to journalists at Eleme, shortly after inspecting the ongoing rehabilitation of the Port Harcourt Refinery.

Lokpobiri reassured Nigerians that the Port Harcourt Refinery will come on stream before the end of 2023 and will be producing between 54,000 barrels and 60,000 barrels per day.

He said: “The essence of today’s inspection is to come and see the extent of done in the Port Harcourt Refinery. It is the beginning of our efforts to go round all the refineries in this country.

“From Port Harcourt we will go to Warri, we will go to Kaduna. We will also go to Dangote Refinery where we also have stake. Our own objective is to ensure that in the next few years, Nigeria stops fuel importation. That is why we are here to see the extent of work done.

“From what we are seeing here, Port Harcourt Refinery will come on board by the end of the year. Warri will start by the first quarter of next year and then, Kaduna will come on stream towards the end of next year.

“If we add that together with Dangote Refinery, we will be able to stop fuel importation that take substantial part of our funds. Nigerians will now have the benefit of full deregulation. The idea is to ensure that we complete these refineries on time. That is why we are here.

“The Port Harcourt Refinery, when it comes on stream, will be producing 54,000 to 60,000 barrels per day. Warri, which will start around February next year will produce about 70,000 barrels per day. We believe that Kaduna will come on before the end of next year.

“Then, the whole of this Port Harcourt Refinery will be fully rehabilitated by the end of next year. We believe that Nigerians should expect better supply of fuel, better economy. We believe that this project will be completed on schedule.”

On his part, the Minister of State for Gas Resources, Hon. Kperikpe Ekpo, assured Nigerians that there will be increase in gas generation, which in turn will lead to uninterrupted power supply in the country.

Ekpo said: “From what we have seen today, gas flaring will stop and gas generation will increase so that we can have uninterrupted power supply in the country. So, I am comfortable with what I have seen, the improvement is there and they are dedicated to the work.”

The Former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation (FMHADMSD) Sadiya Farouq has been indicted by the National Executive Council (NEC) of robbing the poor through the National Social Investment Program, as the Federal Government begins verification of the National Social Register (NSR).

NSR is an information system that supports the outreach, intake, registration, and determination of potential eligibility for one or more social programs.

In January 2022, Farouq said over 46 million vulnerable Nigerians have been captured on the NSR, and the number was pushed up based on insecurity which led to an increase in displaced persons in need of intervention.

However, in July 2023, NEC which is headed by Vice President Kashim Shettima, dumped former President Muhammadu Buhari’s national social register, describing it as a fraud, phantom, bogus, and ambiguous program, indicting Farouq.

It was under the register that over N3trn was distributed by Farouq in the last few years, according to NEC.

Meanwhile the newly inaugurated Minister of FMHADMSD, Betta Edu, on Friday claimed that the 46 million vulnerable Nigerians captured in the NSR were neither poor nor vulnerable.

Edu said this on Friday during an interview with Channels Television, while responding to questions on the verification of the NSR, monitored by THE WHISTLER.

She said, “The first thing which we are starting almost immediately is the verification of the National Social Register.

“For a couple of days and weeks, we have been going back and forth with the governors’ forum and several interested parties, saying ‘the register is okay and not okay.

“We are going to first carry out a full verification of the social register to ensure that truly it is the poorest of the poor, those who deserve to be on that list, that are on that list.

“We will verify, remove, and update the register, and it will be owned by Nigerians both at national, state, and local government areas and even in the community.”

She reiterated that the verification process will cut across the three tiers of government because they complained that one of the challenges, they encounter is non-inclusiveness.

“The process of really getting the poorest of the poor is that we have to have ownership of whatever data that must be used from the grassroots, so we can say these are the poor people, we know them, not just numbers and names, but they are human beings and we can identify them.

“This will be done through the involvement of the NEC, governors, local, traditional rulers, and religious rulers” Edu reiterated.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) "has not declared war on the people of Niger nor is there any plan to invade" the country, Dr Omar Touray, President of the ECOWAS Commission told journalists in Abuja, the Nigerian capital on Friday, 25 August.

But he described as "unacceptable," the 36-month transition plan announced by the Brig.-Gen. Abdourahamane Tchiani-led junta to restore constitutional order in Niger.

ECOWAS leaders had at their emergency summit on 30th July given the junta, which toppled elected President Mohamed Bazoum on 26th July, within seven days to reinstate him or face military action.

After the ultimatum had passed and given the junta's reluctance to engage in negotiations, including its refusal to receive a joint ECOWAS-AU-UN Mission, ECOWAS leaders ordered the activation of the regional Standby Force for possible deployment to Niger.

Subsequently, ECOWAS military chiefs after their last emergency meeting in Ghana on 19 August, announced that a "D-Day" for the force deployment had be decided, with the military only waiting for a go-ahead by regional leaders.

In the interim period, the junta continued to consolidate it's hold on power with the appointment of a 21-member ministerial cabinet headed by a civilian Prime Minister.

But after receiving the ECOWAS Special Envoy, Nigeria's former Head of State, Gen Abdulsalami Abubakar in Niamey last weekend, the junta said it was ready for dialogue, but went ahead to announce the three-year transition plan, which ECOWAS has now rejected.

The use of military force in Niger is unpopular because of the complexity of the situation, particularly the involvement of France and the U.S., which have military bases and therefore, strategic defence and economic interests in Niger.

ECOWAS sanctions, including border closure, freeze of financial transactions by most member States, and Nigeria's suspension of electricity supplies to Niger are already biting hard on landlocked Niger's population.

Food is scare or expensive where available, with hospitals reporting high numbers of avoidable deaths.

Military intervention could worsen the situation with possibility of a catastrophic war and grave humanitarian disaster.

In line with the preference for the diplomatic option over military intervention, the ECOWAS Chairman and Nigeria's President Bola Tinubu on Thursday in Abuja received a group of Muslim Ulamas (scholars), and urged them to continue their back-channel initiatives toward a peaceful resolution of the Niger impasse.

It is expected that a consensus to avoid a possible risky military option could be a transition programme of less than 24 months and Bazoum's early release from the junta's detention.

Three other ECOWAS member States - Mali, Guinea Conakry and Burkina Faso - are already under military rule.

The resurgence of military coups or recession of democracy in West Africa is caused largely by governance failures characterised by insecurity and "constitutional, ballot box, human rights and rule of law coups" perpetrated by the political class.

There have been so much hues and cries amongst some Nigerians and public commentators about the exclusion of Nigeria from the recent BRICS conference hosted by South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa, despite its previous position as Africa’s leading economy. This has sparked debates among analysts who hold different views about the development. The conference which took place in South Africa recently admitted new members into the BRICS, which include, Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Some argue that Nigeria’s drop in GDP following the devaluation of its currency may have been a reason for its exclusion. On the other hand, others believe that Nigeria may not have thought it expedient in its interest and necessary to join the BRICS, considering Nigeria’s historical role as a founding member of the defunct Organization of African Unity, where the policy of non- aligned nations was adopted by member-states, and its commitment to remain non-aligned during the Cold War till date, could have influenced its exclusion. But the BRICS organization cannot be said to have excluded a country that never applied for membership in a union that it may not have thought appropriate to join, at least not for now.

Further to the ongoing debate on whether Nigeria should remain non-aligned and not join BRICS, considering its historical ties with South Africa, its economic and diplomatic ties with the other members, and the rapidly changing dynamics of global power.

The critical issue on the exclusion of Nigeria from the BRICS conference ought to be analyzed, and exploring the potential reasons behind it, and juxtaposing the economic implications of Nigeria’s drop in GDP and its historical role as a non-aligned country during and after the Cold War.

Then considering the somewhat oscillating, uneasy and unpredictable relations between Nigeria and South Africa, particularly in light of Nigeria’s support during South Africa’s apartheid era, and recent xenophobic attacks on mainly Nigerian businesses/traders in South Africa and to a less extent, the reprisal attacks on South African interests in Nigeria.

Finally, the question should be, whether Nigeria should remain non-aligned and refrained from joining BRICS, given Russia’s declining influence and the recent invasion of Ukraine. And the fact that Nigeria has always maintained a historic, diverse, and cordial economic and socio-political relations with the Western bloc, comprising mainly, the USA, the UK and Europe.

Let me therefore highlight the dynamics that should inform and guide our foreign policy advisors of President Bola Tinubu on this recent euphoria of BRICS, which I will advise, Nigeria not to consider at this time, but maybe in the future. For now, the Tinubu government should concentrate on fixing and steading the wobbling ship of the Nigerian state, which finds itself in tempestuous waters of economic, political and social turmoil.

The following considerations should inform Nigeria’s decision to join BRICS, and keep to its age long non-aligned status, while still maintaining its cordial relations with the members of any country or bloc that have mutual respect for Nigeria and share our common interests and values to make the world and better and safer place.

First, Economic Factors:
Nigeria’s drop in GDP following the devaluation of its currency should focus more on fixing its ailing economy, debt servicing and generally have a firm and positive grip on its fiscal and monetary policies rather than being a pawn in proxy struggles for supremacy between the superpowers in any euphemistic union, at this point in time. Perhaps, Nigeria could consider joining in the future.

As the leading economy in Africa, Nigeria’s economic stability is crucial for the continent’s growth. However, the devaluation of the Naira, in any case, may have weakened Nigeria’s position, making it less attractive for BRICS membership. This economic factor, that is, if BRICS does extend invitation for membership cannot be overlooked, as BRICS seeks to strengthen economic ties among its members.

Secondly, Historical Significance:
Nigeria’s historical role as a founding member of the defunct Organization of African Unity and its non-aligned status during the Cold War, and thereafter could have influenced its exclusion from BRICS invitation if that was the authentic reason Nigeria’s commitment to non-alignment during a time of intense global power rivalry demonstrated its independence and desire to maintain neutrality. This historical significance may have clashed with the objectives and alignment of BRICS, informing Nigeria’s not expressing any interest in membership.

Thirdly, Nigeria-South Africa Relations:
Nigeria’s support for South Africa during its apartheid era, both financially, diplomatically, and militarily, raises questions about South Africa’s gratitude towards Nigeria, if truly invitations were extended to other African countries to the exclusion of Nigeria.
Recall that Nigeria played a significant role in assisting and supporting South Africa during its struggle against apartheid, and it is reasonable to expect some reciprocity. However, if South Africa’s exclusion of Nigeria from BRICS is seen as spiteful, it raises concerns about the sincerity of their relationship.

Lastly, Russia’s Influence:
Joining BRICS, which is championed by Russia, may not be in Nigeria’s best interest considering Russia’s declining international influence. The invasion of Ukraine and subsequent economic sanctions have weakened Russia’s military and economic power. Nigeria should carefully consider aligning itself with a bloc led by a country experiencing a downturn in power, as it may not provide the desired benefits in the long run.

In conclusion, the exclusion of Nigeria from the BRICS conference, despite the fact that Nigeria’s Vice President, Kashim Shettima was in attendance, albeit as an Observer, raises questions about the reasons behind it. While economic factors, such as Nigeria’s drop in GDP, may have played a role, historical significance and the Nigeria-South Africa relations cannot be ignored. Nigeria’s non-aligned status during the Cold War and its support for South Africa during apartheid may have clashed with the objectives and alignment of BRICS. Therefore, I would caution that Nigeria should carefully consider aligning itself with a bloc led by Russia, whose influence is waning internationally. Ultimately, Nigeria’s decision to remain non-aligned or join BRICS should be based on a thorough analysis of its own interests and the changing dynamics of global power.

In a week full of high drama on the international scene - the murder of Yevgeny Prigozhin in Russia; Donald Trump’s mug shot in a Georgia prison; India landing a spacecraft on the moon and the cable car rescue in Pakistan – the 15th Summit of the BRICS nations in South Africa managed to grab a few headlines. For Nigeria, the meeting turned out to be another humiliating moment as its application to join the economic bloc was turned down. Instead, Ethiopia, Egypt; Argentina; UAE and Saudi Arabia were invited to join with effect from January 2024. Twenty countries, including Nigeria and Indonesia applied to be members, and 20 others had expressed interest, but had not applied. So, why did our country seek to join BRICS in the first place, and why were we rejected and why was Ethiopia, a relatively smaller economy currently wracked by civil war, chosen? Is this rejection yet another national embarrassment for this country which had suffered severe mismanagement in the hands of its corrupt political leaders? Is this a vote of no confidence on the Tinubu administration?

Vice President Kashim Shetima who attended the conference in the place of the President said Nigeria wanted to be a member because we are seeking a partnership that provides opportunities for all to engage in trade, prosperity and shared progress with no marginalization based on geography, race and legitimate sovereign affiliations. In a statement he read at the event, the VP said: ‘’We want a partnership that guarantees a world governed by acceptable rules and norms. These nations confront historical developmental vulnerabilities and challenges that are beyond their control. Thus, it is imperative for us to unite within regional groups and forge a novel form of international cooperation’’.

Mr. Shettima said the objective of BRICS is to foster global economic governance reform while enhancing the representation and voice of emerging economies or developing countries. But the government is yet to make any statement on why our request was turned down. As in many other degrading instances, our leaders may just shrug this off and move on as if nothing happened. But at the heart of this snub is decades of mismanagement, corruption and incompetent leadership that have weakened this country. The world can no longer tolerate us. The rejection of Nigeria’s bid to join BRICS is among the worst diplomatic humiliation that we have suffered as a country. It is the ultimate chastening of a nation once referred to as the giant of Africa. Among others, it will deny us the opportunity to access capital in the group’s soon-to-be formed global development bank. How I wish we did not even bother to apply. Nigeria’s political class should cover themselves in sackcloth and weep in shame for one month. they have damaged this nation irreparably.

The group started as BRIC, an acronym for Brazil; Russia; India and China, in 2009 and in 2010, South Africa was admitted. Its vision is to serve as champion of the needs of the Global South. This includes the need for beneficial economic growth, sustainable development and the reform of the multilateral systems. According to South African President, Cyril Ramaphosa, BRICS is committed to inclusive multilateralism and upholding international law, including the purposes and principles enshrined in the UN Charter. The presence of the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres at the Summit and his poignant message on the need to uphold multilateralism supports this position.

Many developing countries have often chafed against what they see as US imperialism and an unequal international system, and so, they like the idea of a group challenging the status quo. This is why BRICS appears so appealing and many want to belong despite the diverseness and oddities in its composition. Two of the founding members are the world’s largest democracy (India) and the world’s biggest autocracy (China). But BRICS is determined to forge ahead as a veritable alternative to western alliances. The Summit has asked member-states’ Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors to work on the issue of local currencies, payment instruments and platforms and report back at the next Summit, which will hold in Russia. In other words, BRICS is considering an alternative currency to the dollar as the global reserve currency. That is a tall dream that would take years and a lot of hard work to materialize.

Before it expanded its membership this week, BRICS was already a politically and economically diverse group with 40% of the world’s population and 25% of global GDP. The expansion of its membership should make it a powerful economic and political force that would further serve as a counterweight to what it perceives as US dominance. BRICS is also setting up a development bank as alternative to the IMF and the World Bank. But it is unclear how the new members will affect the acronym by which the group had been known.

Relations among the BRICS nations have not always been chummy. China and India squabble over a section of their border, and now with six new members, the eccentricities are visible. Iran and Saudi Arabia are old political foes, although they have managed to patched things up lately. There have also been tensions between Egypt and Ethiopia over hydroelectric dam on the Nile.

Unlike the G7, BRICS are also ideologically diverse. India is pro West with an extreme right-wing leadership which believes in neoliberal economics. It is also pursuing an independent international economic policy. India is one of the top 10 global industrial powers; its huge population is matched by a strong industrial base and a powerful military. Though a huge segment of the Indian population is very poor, the country is a major exporter of manufactured goods and pharmaceuticals. It builds its own main battle tanks and warships. India is advancing in aerospace, having just this week landed a space ship on the moon, the fourth country to be able to do so, and the first country to land on the south pole of the moon. This was a very proud week for the country whose, science and technology are very advanced. The country has nuclear capability. It cannot be dictated to, and it adamantly refuses to be.

Ethiopia is not pro West. Its economy is smaller than Nigeria's but it has a record of defiance of the West. For some time now, the US has been pressing Ethiopia to privatize its banks, threatening to kick it out of AGOA but Ethiopia has refused. Ethiopia is not paying much heed to the US over its ongoing civil war either. It’s also quite close to China. In fact, it is more integrated into the China Belt and Road Initiative than Nigeria is, notwithstanding our bigger trade links with China. Vestiges of Ethiopia’s earlier close working relationship and ideological affinity with the Soviet Union also remain. In summary, Ethiopia or at least its rulers, may have more respect globally than Nigeria’s politicians.

Nigeria on the other hand is very poor, with a weak industrial and productive economic base. Its political leaders are among the most corrupt and incompetent set of people in the whole world. Nothing matters to them apart from their wellbeing, comfort and luxury lifestyle. Nigeria is not in a position to assert itself as an independent player in world affairs. Its economy may soon come under the ministrations of the IMF and World Bank. We need their seal of approval on our policy to get much needed support of the global investment community. Our leaders can't stand up to the West if they need to and our economy isn't doing that great. ‘’Nigeria’s membership of BRICS is therefore less likely given our poor economic status. At the moment, our foreign reserves position is lower than the market capitalization of three top South African banks’’, said an economist and banker who works for the Nigerian government.

It is an immense national tragedy that Nigeria was passed over for Ethiopia and Egypt. It is an awkward turn of events that the elites should talk about openly.