We must ask that why is France being sent parking from these countries, also that if other countries are distancing themselves from France why are we drawing her closer, and that what exactly does France want from Nigeria this time that it coincides with when it is being chased away from French Africa or why the sudden relationship with Nigeria now?The current Nigeria and France “renewed” relationship is what comes to my mind as I think about the recent X (Twitter) discourse I facilitated on slavery, colonialism, imperialism and the Nigerian Agriculture. Whether the renewed relationship means good for Nigeria?
As Asiwaju visited Paris, signed among others to deepen commerce and diplomatic ties, was a $300m pact to develop in Nigeria critical sectors agriculture inclusive. This is important for many reasons: the present state of food insecurity in the nation, France’s agricultural capacity, and a changing nature of geopolitics in Africa.
France has an $80bn annual agricultural output. This represents 18% of EU’s total agricultural output, earning her EU’s largest agricultural producer. Her agrifood industry yielded over $200bn in sales last 2 years.
Such ties with a strong agricultural state could promote mutually beneficial trade and adoption of progressive ideas for agricultural transformation and help fix food insecurity in Nigeria.
While this development appears new and promising, the history of contract suggests otherwise.
First is that Nigeria already does a $5bn trade with France. The nation with this is France’s largest trade partner in Sub-Saharan Africa. In 2022, Nigeria’s export to France amounted to $4.95bn and France’s to Nigeria $645m.
While it appears a positive trade balance for Nigeria, 84% of Nigeria’s export was crude oil and followed by petroleum gas ($598m) and soybean meal ($78.7m).
France’s exports, however, were formed largely by refined petroleum (11.25%), medical supplies (8.4%) and hard liquor (7.5%), and could be benefiting more selling refined products, the raw materials for their manufacturing many originally purchased from Nigeria.
With this it is apparent that trade and a huge one at that was already in place between both countries, but never more on agriculture and value-added products despite the both nation’s agricultural potential, production and dependence.
It thus breeds question on the two nations: why Nigeria does more exports of raw inputs/materials to France and not trade rather, value-added products exploiting Paris’ $80bn agriculture or $200bn agrifood industry?
It is understood that this could just be of Nigeria’s parochial focus on oil commodity export and the sector constituting bulk of its foreign earnings and agricultural exports not given much attention.
However, it is not that Nigeria does not undertake agricultural exports. Nigeria, for instance, does a huge annual £7bn trade with the United Kingdom, £3bn originating from Nigeria where agrifood commodities represent 45% of the commodity exports.
In spite, the 45% agrifood composition just represents 0.4% of the value of the £3bn trade. A major reason for this is that bulk of the Nigerian exports were in raw form and/or raw materials and mineral fuel and related others took more proportional value.
This is what we observe of Nigeria-France trade with soybean meal (raw material) representing the only agricultural produce and crude petroleum taking the lion share of the export pie.
This whole scenario depicts on a broader scale what is of Nigeria’s trade with Western nations (European and US) and is also true for Africa.
For instance, the global cocoa value chain market is worth over $150bn with West Africa accounting for 70% global cocoa production, but while the region supplies bulk of the cocoa used in the world her share of the global cocoa value chain market is just 13%.
West Africa as whole and being the globe’s cocoa production hub realizes in export returns less than $6bn whereas Germany that does not produce cocoa and as a country earns more than $10bn.
A leading reason for this is not unconnected from what we have seen with Nigeria –selling cocoa as mere beans while rich importing nations incorporates value addition, processing into chocolate and other valuable products commanding higher prices.
Why Nigeria and Africa continue to operate this way baffled me and still baffles me, and it was indeed why I held the discourse on foreign influence on the nation, its manufacturing ability and agriculture potential, the impact such interference had on the nation and continues to have at present, the new forms and the structure preserving the skewed order.
We did recognize that there are domestic factors that limit the potential of the nature and pursuing trade routes that yield better and more outcome for the nation but, however, that there were/are external factors (and which even spur, direct and strengthen domestic factors) that impede and sabotage the possibilities of the nation and continent.
Here we talked about the direct exploitation of human and material resources in the name of slavery and theft. The transition to indentured servitude and colonialism with systematic destruction and demotion of manufacturing of high-quality goods and production of value added products in colony states to consumption of and dependence on inferior foreign goods and production of raw materials. Also is the preservation and instutionalization of skewed trade, raw material supply and agricultural value chains dynamics with predatory lending, debt-loading, bureaucratic gates, political and economic measures, hereditary democracy and strategic placement of stooges.
Thus, when France seeks a ‘renewed’ bilateral relationship and after virtually none on agriculture, we must ask why, what it really wants, why now, and if it would really amount to anything significant judging by its history and present state of affairs.
It is important to remind that France was one of the seven western European nations that undertook the great ‘scramble for Africa’ partitioning the continent into segments for colonization (an evolved exploitation machinery established after slavery and forceful labour saw rebuke) and also instituted both formal and informal imperialisms and neocolonialism to sustain manipulated commerce, power sphere and Francafrique.
The French never left fully even after independence, covertly and overtly interfering with political, social and economic processes with liberal interventionism, cultural engineering and economic schemes usurping the financial system of the Francophone African nations, pegging their currency to Euro and their foreign reserve deposited in the French treasure in the guise of assistance with proper administration for a strong and stable financial system while raking in humongous profit and giving back peanut aid, this by itself a neocolonialism structure.
Paris in the past sought expansionist ambition to grow their wealth and also rival other European nations in the trade of sugar, tobacco, rubber, gold, diamond and some other cash crops and valuable precious resources, thus established their primary production hub in the colonies for exploitation to supply French-owned processing companies in French Africa and Paris for the benefits of France and French capitalists.
While establishing local production appears good for the former colonies, it only demoted them to and ensured their permanent position in the manufacturing role along the value chains.
This position and a consistent supply of those materials and at cheaper cost is being maintained today by an imperial constitution of France’s unfettered right to access resources and raw materials in previous colonies, a pegged currency, currency arbitrage, amalgamation of financial systems, deliberate bureaucracy with exportation of value-added products of colonial masters’ interest, and soft power pressure.
France had been involved in unrests and coups in French Africa removing leaders and destabilizing the region to assert dominance and exploit strategic interests. It led NATO into French North Africa, Lybia to remove Gaddafi, supported by the United States and United Kingdom, a tool from the old play book western nations setting aside their differences and aligning forces abroad and in colony against a common enemy and/or in pursing common interest, for instance against the Soviets and like we currently see against Russia in French West and Equatorial Africa.
The destabilization of Libya paved way for escalation of conflicts, emergence of insurgents and them emboldened, the proliferation of arms and spread of terrorism across Sub-Saharan Africa, leaving behind fierce contest for resources, destruction of or rending unfit for production cultivable lands, and hunger, malnutrition, poverty and deaths.
It is a major reason for the sharp rise of insurgency and terrorism in Nigeria after the Libyan regime change with insurgents and arms finding way into the nation through neigbouring countries as Chad and Niger.
This has wreaked havoc on the nation’s food production capability with seize of arable lands, destruction and theft of farm produces and investments, displacement and maiming of rural inhabitants and farmers, and disruption of economic activities and supply chains with frequent unrests, tolls and levies.
Insecurity has been reported to be responsible for 50% of Nigeria’s food insecurity. About 100,000 people have been killed, many of them farmer, to insecurity in the Northern Nigeria from 2011 to 2023 in the administration of former presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari. This led to many farmers fleeing their farms and abandoning production and which widened supply-demand gap.
It then begs the question why go into a more cordial relationship and that would involve sharing intelligence and establishment of naval base with a nation that has history of engineering schemes instigating unrest, sabotaging economies and food systems that directly and indirectly affect you or an arrangement that may not benefit you judging by the history of your trade with them wrapped around supply of raw materials and not value-added products?
It is important to remind again that France had been fingered in fomenting state dissolution efforts in Nigeria backing separatist groups. Could this renewed arrangement enable such treasonous cause?
It is important to remind that France recently has been booted out by former colonies, Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso with the same sentiment of tie severance spreading across Francophone African countries.
We must ask that why is France being sent parking from these countries, also that if other countries are distancing themselves from France why are we drawing her closer, and that what exactly does France want from Nigeria this time that it coincides with when it is being chased away from French Africa or why the sudden relationship with Nigeria now?
About 70% of France’s energy source comes from nuclear energy. 19% of the uranium required to power the nuclear plants comes from Niger. Paris’ energy security appears threatened with the kick-out of France by Niger.
It is worth mentioning that Niger which supplies France with bulk of the materials to generate power suffers blackouts in several homes to inability to fully utilize domestic energy generating resources for the benefit of self. It informs on the issue among many others that could be fuelling tension between French Africa and France.
This could be one of the reasons France looks toward Nigeria, rich in oil, gas deposits and agricultural commodities that it is being presently deprived of and important for the proper functioning of her economy.
The Russian gas and Russia and Ukraine grains are not coming anymore or as they use to with the expansion of NATO eastward and Ukraine’s plan to join NATO contravening agreements and an attending direct war (Russia-Ukraine) and proxy war (West vs. Russia/Soviet/East) straining political ties and cutting gas and grain supply that have triggered elevated cost of gas, manufacturing and food in Europe.
It is however understood that even while France and other countries in Europe suffer supply chains effect of Russia’s austere measures, some European countries could be gaining from such disruption and may have manipulated the supply chains.
For instance, the grain production capability of Ukraine drastically declined to the war, with France although known to be producer of grains but now and with the United States, Canada and Australia encroached supply gap left open by Ukraine’s declined and now replacing Ukraine’s export to countries dependent on Ukraine for about 50% of their grain needs. Also, these country that took over Ukraine trade Russia inclusive, have moved up in production scale. It is reported that these major producers not only boost their capacity to produce more grains with supply gap but also risen price of grains.
There is also another gas supply arrangement where the US now feeds Europe with gas and at higher cost as against from Russia.
However, back to the discussion, could it be that France’s newly pursued relationship with Nigeria is of neocolonialism playbook to find subtle, other means to preserve the order of things and/or find new host to ensure continuous flow of resources to keep the French (western) capitalism machinery running which is ever-expanding and consistently in need of resources which without would implode and collapse?
It should be recollected that the President of Nigeria, Tinubu wrote to the Senate seeking military intervention in Niger and tried to lobby ECOWAS to restore normalcy in Francophones and stem the wave of ties severance with France.
It would be naïve to think Nigeria wanting to invade Niger does not have the hand of France and those of other western nations not only wanting to ensure raw materials and energy security but also counter a growing Russian influence and that Nigeria does not have interests dependent on normalcy and stability in Niger and neigbouring countries around Niger.
Nigeria thus has an ambitious $13bn Trans-Saharan gas pipeline project that would run through French Africa (Niger, Algeria and Tunisia accordingly) to Europe through Italy that promises gas alternative for Europe seeking alternative energy source in Africa to replace Russian gas, which a coup in Niger of a government friendly to France and ties severance with France, a strengthening of relationship between Niger and Russia and a gas development project between both threaten.
It becomes evident Africa would increasingly become hotbed of geopolitical strategic game with worsening global energy security and changing power dynamics and with Nigeria having more role to play.
Hence, while it is important to ask what France really wants with a renewed relationship with Nigeria, it also important to ask what is in the agreement of the Nigerian government with France, whether Nigeria understands what is unfolding, if it would seek better arrangement that benefits itself and the African continent, and how it would maneuver the great game of influence and power dynamics where it must play and under the influence of soft power.
Perhaps the $80bn agriculture and $200bn agrifood industry value of the trade partner is worth it and Nigeria would seek arrangement of trade that are fair and embodies high valuable products beneficial for both countries.
It is in our hope that Nigeria does not become an exploitation ground and also a Launchpad for the exploitation of other African countries by external political actors who are self-interested and do not mean good for the nation and continent, and that those in charge of the nation’s affairs do not become stooges and take actions that would catalyse tension within the country, inter-nations and across the continent regressing Nigeria and Africa and having them in the clenched fist of the imperialists.