Connect with us

World

From U.S., more trouble for Nigeria’s businesses, tech innovators, students

Published

on

Spread the love

Ambassador Joe Keshi is Nigeria’s retired top career diplomat to the United States (US). In this interview, Keshi diagnoses the US reduction, last week, of the five-year visa validity for Nigerians to three months, effective July 8, 2025, stressing the urgent need for Nigeria to negotiate and build a cordial relationship with the US as this means more trouble for Nigeria’s businesses, tech innovators and students based on the cost of visa renewal every three months. Although the US Mission in Nigeria, which announced the new regime, initially gave reciprocity as the reason for the action, it later reversed itself, saying it was not a reciprocal action.

According to the embassy, the measure also has no connection with Nigeria’s stance on accepting deportees from Venezuela, the recent introduction of e-visa policies, or its affiliations with Brazil, Russia, India, China and South-Africa (BRICS), a group of five emerging economies which has expanded into 11 nations and which Nigeria is seeking to join. But rather, it is “a part of an ongoing global review of the use of US visas by other countries using technical and security benchmarks to safeguard US immigration systems.”

“We value our longstanding partnership with Nigeria and remain committed to working closely with the Nigerian public and government officials to help them meet those criteria and benchmarks, thereby ensuring safe, lawful, and mutually beneficial travel between our nations,” the embassy wrote in a Friday post on X.

The Federal Government faulted the US action, with officials suggesting different reasons but saying the US action was not justified. The Presidency issued a statement, noting that the claim of reciprocity as the reason for the visa policy did not accurately reflect the reality of Nigeria’s current visa policy toward US citizens.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yusuf Tuggar, for his part, linked the new policy to the rejection of Venezuelan deportees from the US, a claim the country’s Nigerian Mission denied. The minister said the pressure on Nigeria to accept Venezuelan deportees is unfair as the country already has its own problems.

“It will be difficult for a country like Nigeria to accept Venezuelan prisoners into Nigeria. We have enough problems of our own”, he said during a live program on TV. “We cannot accept Venezuelan deportees to Nigeria for crying out loud. We already have 230 million people. You will be the same people that would castigate us if we acquiesce to accepting Venezuelans from US prisons to be brought in”. Meanwhile, the retired diplomat says: “The worst part is that this policy would increase the corruption in the process. No embassy, particularly in Nigeria, would tell you that there’s no corruption in visa issuance. There’s huge corruption. So Nigerians pay a lot, and with this new policy, we probably have to pay more”. Excerpts:

What impact do you foresee the new single-entry visa policy having on Nigerian travelers and businesses with frequent US visits?

Naturally, the policy is going to have lots of impact, and it’s going to create disruption, particularly for business people who are always on the move. When you consider the tedious process of applying for and getting a US visa, you can apply this month, and they will tell you that the interview is next year. So if you have an urgent meeting in Washington, United States, it simply means that you can’t go. This is why the development is very unfortunate. But one way or the other, it hurts both sides.

But it hurts Nigeria more than it hurts the US because, quite often, how many Americans come to Nigeria anyway? So Nigeria would bear the burden of this kind of policy. In terms of cost, it means that Nigerians would have to be paying so much every three months to travel to the United States. Already find out how much Nigerians pay to get visas from these advanced countries. It is so mind-boggling that these countries would turn around to lecture us on capital flight through their visa policies.

They are, actually. They are actually contributing to their capital flight both legally and illegally. The worst part is that this policy would increase the corruption in the process. No embassy, particularly in Nigeria, would tell you that there’s no corruption in visa issuance.

There’s huge corruption. So Nigerians pay a lot, and with this new policy, we probably have to pay more. I seriously hope that efforts being made by Minister of Interior Olubumi Ojo and the Minister of Foreign Affairs are fruitful and that the US would listen to our plea and go back to the old policy.

How can the Nigerian government navigate the global visa reciprocity process to secure more favourable visa terms with the US?

We have to be realistic about issues. In this game, Nigeria has no chance of winning. The bulk of people who visit Nigeria from the United States are Nigerians, or you could say Nigerian-Americans. Some have found the way to circumvent the ‘wahala’ by having Nigerian and American passports. But the truth is, for us to navigate, we have to reach an agreement with the United States because more Nigerians travel to the United States and more Americans are travelling to Nigeria.

90 per cent of Americans that come to Nigeria are Nigerian-Americans. While in service, I had been urging Nigeria to build a far more cordial relationship with the United States, but we pretend to deceive ourselves by saying we have a strategic relationship with the US. We never had any strategic relationship with them.

Can you compare Nigeria’s importance to the US to that of Egypt or Israel? No, you cannot. But building a far more cordial relationship makes more sense than deceiving ourselves with being more strategic. So the new policy gives us an opportunity to evaluate our relationship with the United States and begin to see how to build it up. We do not have American investments in Nigeria when compared to South Africa, which had 6, 000 American companies in South Africa. I don’t know how many American companies are in Nigeria. International investment should not be one-sided. Nigerians in the tech industry and students who want to go are now to be constrained by this policy, which is why every effort should be made to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.

How can Nigerian citizens adjust their travel plans to mitigate the effects of the new visa policy?

The best adjustment we can make is to negotiate. I gathered there was an agreement on a US five-year visa but that our implementation was poor. While the US began theirs immediately, it took us some time. I think there’s more to it.

Coming close to it is the BRICS meeting where US President Donald Trump vowed to punish those doing business without using the dollar. Also, as Americans are changing their policy, the UAE is doing the same thing. So you begin to ask yourself if we are not responsible for all this. We need to find out what our people are doing wrong that is warranting this staggering policy.

What role do you think security concerns play in the US’s decision to implement this new visa policy for Nigerian citizens?

I don’t think security concerns played a role. How many Americans come to Nigeria compared to the Indians?

Could the policy update affect Nigeria’s global reputation and relationships with other countries?

When I was serving in Atlanta many years ago, I said to a governor in the northern states that it is not only the misbehaviour of Nigerians that creates image problems for Nigeria; government-owned mistakes and behaviour create more image problems for Nigeria. I still maintain my position on that.

What we should advocate is that the Nigerian government should, as a matter of urgency and as a matter of policy, review all its visa relationships with a number of countries.

The government should first discuss with these countries, particularly countries like England, how to reduce the cost of visas. Have you ever done research on how much Nigerians pay to get visas to a number of these countries?

Calculate it: if about 20,000 Nigerians get a visa from an embassy, how much would an embassy be making in one year? That is how much Nigeria is losing to these countries through the visa review. The visa review of all the countries in Nigeria does not favour Nigerians. The annoying thing is these countries make a lot of money, both from the legal ones Nigerians pay as well as the illegal ones through middlemen.

Are there potential opportunities for Nigeria to diversify its international partnerships and reduce dependence on the US due to this policy change?

In international relations, who are your friends? If you build four blocks, who are those that would be in the first block? Who are those that would be in the second block? Who would be in the third block? Considering our economy, the first block would be filled by the Asian countries; there are over 200 Indian companies in Nigeria. Japanese companies are in Nigeria, Korean companies are in Nigeria.

Now, how many British companies do we have today in Nigeria? Maybe they provide services; where do you place the Americans? On the flipside, what is Nigeria itself doing in terms of production? What exactly are we exporting to these countries that would make us strategic partners in terms of trade beyond oil? Is it enough to make us strategic partners in terms of trade? It is when we become more productive that our currency is strengthened…otherwise all these we are doing are cosmetics.

In other words, we can strengthen our currency via production and our exports, not imports.

It is what makes China so rich today. The bulk of the taxes President Trump ordered were against Asian countries. It’s because they export lots of goods to the United States. They are the US’s largest trading partners, but Nigeria does not have that kind of advantage. The bottom line is production on all fronts.

Source : Vanguard.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

World

Iran executes two men convicted of spying for Israel

Published

on

Spread the love

Iran on Monday executed two men convicted of spying for Israel, the judiciary said, the latest in a wave of hangings over alleged espionage.

Since the start of the war with Israel and the United States in February, Tehran has ramped up executions, with many of the convicts accused of spying for Israeli intelligence.

“Omid Behzad and Pouria Safvat were hanged this morning for transmitting the coordinates of sensitive military and security sites to Mossad agents,” said Mizan, the media outlet for Iran’s judiciary, referring to Israel’s foreign intelligence service.

It did not specify when the pair were arrested or when they went on trial, but said they were convicted of “espionage and collaboration with the Zionist regime”.

“They helped the intelligence services achieve their objectives by providing them with information on military and security centres during the war,” Mizan added.

The number of executions in Iran has risen since the start of the war, which broke out on February 28 with massive US-Israeli strikes that killed Iran’s supreme leader.

Iran is the world’s second-most prolific executioner after China, according to rights groups including Amnesty International.

The authorities executed at least 1,639 people last year, a record high since 1989, according to Iran Human Rights, an NGO based in Norway, and Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM), which is headquartered in Paris.

On Tuesday, Amnesty denounced what it said was the “escalation” in executions after Iran announced the hanging of two men found guilty of taking part in anti-government protests during the winter.

Continue Reading

World

South Africa police move foreigners seeking safety from anti-migrant threats

Published

on

Spread the love

Authorities removed Thursday scores of foreign nationals who had sought protection from anti-migrant groups at a church centre in Durban in a days-long standoff, highlighting xenophobic tensions in South Africa.

Campaigns by small citizen-led groups against undocumented migrants have picked up in recent months, but without reaching the level of violence seen in waves of anti-foreigner attacks over previous years.

Police herded about 400 migrants from countries including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Rwanda and Somalia onto buses and removed them from the complex in the east coast city where some had been camped for days.

Local anti-immigrant campaigners cheered and chanted “They must go!” as the foreign nationals — including women and children — were driven to a government refugee centre.

Some pressed identity documents to bus windows to show they had the proper papers to be in South Africa.

Several told AFP they had left their homes in fear after anti-immigrant locals went door-to-door to tell undocumented foreigners to leave by June 30.

Their ultimatum has no legal weight and is not backed by the authorities.

 

There were some scuffles during the evacuation, with one man breaking free and chased by locals before police intervened.

– Blame –

Anti-immigrant figurehead Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma told reporters that her group, March and March, opposed violence but wanted all undocumented foreign nationals to leave.

The group blames migrants for social ills such as high unemployment and crime, but analysts say this is scapegoating.

Meanwhile, Ghana said Thursday it planned to evacuate more than 800 of its citizens from South Africa after a viral video showing the alleged assault of a Ghanaian man triggered outrage.

South Africa has faced recurring waves of xenophobic violence since 2008, when dozens of migrants were killed and thousands displaced.

There were similar flare-ups in 2015 and 2021, often sparked by economic frustrations and political mobilisation around anti-immigrant rhetoric.

The latest spike comes as political parties seek support ahead of local government elections in six months.

One of the migrants at the Durban centre, Robert Ikobia, told AFP he had left the DRC when he was 12 years old to escape war.

“I have the papers to be here. But every time there has been a xenophobic upheaval, I have been a victim,” he said.

“In 2012, I was shot in the head and nearly died. A few years later, I was stabbed by a mob. I fled a war in my country, yet I cannot find peace in South Africa,” he said.

 

 

Continue Reading

World

Uganda’s 81-year-old president sworn in for seventh term

Published

on

Spread the love

Yoweri Museveni has been sworn in for a seventh consecutive term as president of Uganda, extending his nearly four-decade rule after securing victory in the country’s disputed January elections.

The 81-year-old leader, who first took power as a rebel commander in 1986, was inaugurated at the Kololo Independence Grounds in the capital, Kampala, amid tight security and heavy deployment of armoured vehicles across the city on Tuesday, BBC reports.

According to election authorities, Museveni won more than 70 per cent of the votes cast, with his new tenure expected to run until 2031.

His main challenger, Bobi Wine, rejected the outcome, alleging widespread irregularities and ballot manipulation during the polls.

Wine, whose real name is Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, described the election results as “fake” and accused the government of undermining democracy.

The 44-year-old opposition figure later fled the country, claiming he feared for his life.

“The regime wanted to eliminate me,” he reportedly said after leaving Uganda.

Election officials, however, dismissed allegations of fraud and maintained that the polls were free and fair.

Museveni, now among Africa’s longest-serving leaders, joins figures such as Denis Sassou Nguesso, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, and Paul Biya in remaining in power for more than four decades.

Several African leaders attended the inauguration ceremony, including Samia Suluhu Hassan, Félix Tshisekedi, Salva Kiir Mayardit, and Hassan Sheikh Mohamud.

Uganda has one of the youngest populations globally, with many citizens having known no other president besides Museveni.

Although the Ugandan leader has not publicly indicated when he plans to retire, political analysts have speculated that the current tenure could be his final term in office.

Attention has increasingly shifted toward his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who has been widely viewed as a possible successor.

The military chief has, however, faced criticism over controversial social media posts targeting opposition figures, including Wine.

Meanwhile, rights groups have continued to raise concerns about Uganda’s human rights record and the treatment of opposition politicians following the elections.

Amnesty International recently alleged that at least 16 people were killed by security forces between January 15 and 18 during post-election unrest.

The organisation claimed the victims were unarmed and posed no immediate threat.

Another opposition politician, Kizza Besigye, remains in detention after being arrested in late 2024.

Besigye was charged in a military court over allegations relating to illegal weapons possession and attempts to procure arms abroad, accusations he has denied.

The Ugandan government has also faced criticism over a recently passed Sovereignty Bill, which criminalises activities considered to promote “the interests of a foreigner against those of Uganda” and labels recipients of foreign funding as “agents of foreigners.”

Continue Reading

Trending