Why world leaders boycotted Buhari’s UN address

HOUSTON, Sept 30 (International Guardian) – A conclave of world leaders, international media, and other delegates who thronged the United Nation’s General Assembly’s seventieth session were nowhere to be found when Muhammadu Buhari, President of Nigeria, addressed the general debate on September 28, and the poor outing was conspicuously appalling.

What seemed like a mass boycott of President Buhari’s speech may be associated with his nonchalant attitude and a lack of seriousness in communicating severe security issues related to the Boko Haram killings, it was gathered. International Guardian’s correspondent in New York for the event reported a lonely frazzled speaker, sweltering as he imperceptibly picked his words from a written script. “At some point, I thought he was talking to himself,” said Joel McHenry, another delegate, a  Canadian-based observer who spoke to our newsroom.

Another delegate associated with the United States office of the Secretary of States categorically labelled Buhari’s absence and attitude over issues of security as “utterly dismissive.” “World leaders are so engaged with regions serious about their agenda, and Nigeria has not shown that enthusiasm,” he said.   In July, International Guardian reported how President Muhammad Buhari’s exorbitant visit to the United State emitted some horrible stakes causing  the White House to voice  out complete  disappointed about a total lack of preparedness by the Nigerian contingent to discuss vital issues about both countries. The Obama administration had also decried a poor presentation of policy needs and updates made by the Nigerian leader.

President Buhari’s UN outing has equally been riddled with controversy over poor logistics, lackadaisical preparations, and process incomprehensibility. First, he had missed a United Nation’s meeting in which countries affected by Boko Haram’s violence pleaded for assistance for those displaced by the insurgency. In a region where millions are being displaced by the Islamist outfit, Nigeria’s absence from this meeting was seen as blow to a global collaboration for assistance over war against terrorism. For instance, a few weeks ago, the Geneva-based International Organization for Migration estimated that at least 2.1m Nigerians have been displaced since the group began violence in 2009.

Another embarrassment yet plagued President Buhari’s outing when he was prevented from meeting Pope Francis for arriving late at the facility, and aimlessness using the wrong gate.  As a process, presidents, governmental heads, and delegates are expected to arrive early for UN engagements, and facilitators often brief diplomatic officers ahead of time to avoid process failures. It was not clear what happened in President Buhari’s case as his entourage, handlers, and the Nigerian embassy staff were busy trading blames about the shameful outings.

It may be recalled that in July, the President fired all non-career Nigerian ambassadors in foreign countries in what he called an effort to “reposition the country’s foreign policies.” In September consequently, he announced a proposed shutdown of some Nigerian Embassies and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, claiming his actions would cut down costs and wasteful spending. Since these changes, operations at most Nigeria’s foreign offices have been disorderly and structurally unproductive. It was not clear if the prevailing rigid work environment in these offices was the cause of President Buhari’s UN humiliation, but as one  of the Nigerian delegates who anonymously spoke toInternational Guardian in New York put it, “I will not make guesses, but I can assure you that heads will roll.”

Guardian USA