‘Act Of Desperation’: Nigeria’s Costly Bet To Influence Washington
By TIMOTHY HAGGERTY-NWOKOLO
Political Backlash and Claims of Desperation
THE Federal Government’s reported $9 million lobbying contract in the United States has ignited fierce political backlash, with opposition parties, civil society groups and analysts describing the move as an act of desperation that exposes a lack of confidence in Nigeria’s governance and diplomatic institutions.
At the centre of the controversy is a contract between the Nigerian government and DCI Group, a Washington-based lobbying firm linked to former U.S. President Donald Trump. Filed under the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act, the agreement tasks the firm with communicating Nigeria’s counter-terrorism efforts and rebutting allegations of targeted violence against Christians — claims the government has repeatedly denied.
Opposition parties argue that the deal reflects deeper failures at home. The African Democratic Congress (ADC) condemned the expenditure as insensitive, saying it was indefensible for the government to spend millions of dollars polishing its image abroad while Nigerians grapple with insecurity, poverty and rising living costs. According to the party, the contract amounts to an admission that Nigeria’s diplomatic machinery has failed.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was equally scathing, calling the deal defective and embarrassing. Its National Publicity Secretary, Ini Ememobong, questioned why a government with a full Ministry of Information and numerous media aides would outsource its messaging to a foreign firm. He also demanded explanations on funding sources, procurement processes and performance benchmarks.
Analysts say the backlash is intensified by the prolonged absence of Nigerian ambassadors. President Tinubu recalled all ambassadors in September 2023, but has yet to replace them, leaving critical missions understaffed at a time of growing international scrutiny. This vacuum, experts argue, has weakened Nigeria’s voice and forced it into reactive measures.
Public affairs analyst Frank Tietie described the lobbying deal as driven by desperation and a lack of confidence. He noted that while lobbying is a legitimate tool in international politics, Nigeria’s reliance on it reflects an inferior negotiating position shaped by insecurity, corruption concerns and governance challenges. “It is like a schoolboy trying to negotiate with a headmaster who already doubts him,” he said.
Former PDP campaign director Oladimeji Fabiyi also linked the controversy to poor preparation for governance, noting that delays in appointing ministers and ambassadors have repeatedly created avoidable crises. He criticised the decision to spend millions of dollars abroad while critical sectors such as education and infrastructure remain underfunded.
Human rights group HURIWA joined the criticism, describing the contract as wasteful and hypocritical. The organisation argued that the funds would be better spent supporting troops fighting terrorism, adding that Nigeria’s security challenges are already well documented by international observers.
The political storm comes amid heightened pressure from Washington, where Nigeria has been redesignated a “country of particular concern” over religious freedom issues. Analysts say that without ambassadors to engage lawmakers and policymakers directly, Nigeria has resorted to costly intermediaries with political connections.
For many critics, the lobbying deal symbolises a government struggling to control its narrative abroad because it has failed to resolve fundamental problems at home — a strategy they say risks deepening public distrust rather than restoring confidence.
