Nation Branding in Nation
Building – Nigeria as Case-Study (Part One)
by Bolaji Okusaga
- Nigeria: Celebrating a Nation at One Hundred
It all
started with initial chase for slaves which were needed to power the agrarian
economy of the New World around the 14th century and lasted for over four hundred years depleting
Africa of the energy required for growth, as able-bodied men were forcefully
uprooted from their ancestral homes and made to go through the harrowing
experience of the passage through the Atlantic to the New World in chains and
manacles, and the push for an end to this inhuman practice which forced major traders in Agricultural produce in
Europe to seek opportunities in Africa’s booming trade in Oil-Palm, Cocoa,
Rubber, Ground-nuts and other cash crops, hence changing Europe’s strategy from
slave raiding to colonial annexations of
territories in Africa. From the annexation of Lagos as a Colony of England in 1805, to the signing of various treaties
with communities along the River Niger by the Royal Niger Company, the Bismarck Conference of 1884 to 1885 where
the balkanisation of Africa among European powers like Britain, Germany, France,
Portugal and Belgium was signed, sealed and delivered, to the decision by the
British Colonial Authority to merge the Northern and Southern Protectorates
together with the Colony of Lagos in 1914 giving rise to the nation Nigeria on
January 01, 1914 under the leadership of Lord Fredrick Lugard, a nation was
created albeit the fact that it was without the consent of its various
constituents but more out of British economic interest. The fifty-six years
that followed after the birth of the nation Nigeria would witness several
struggles by the new and fledgling elite who had benefited from British
education to seek to rein the leadership of this young nation from its colonial
over-lords. During this period, a lot of
intrigues and sectional bias were introduced into the struggle both from the
British colonial masters and their cronies in an attempt to maintain the status
quo. This period also showed the evident cracks among the elites and the
divided interests inherent within their ranks, mainly playing out through the
setting up of regional groups in order to attain power as the push for
independence was beginning to achieve some results.
Several constitutional conferences were convened in the build up to independence and by October 1960, the British departed, leaving Nigeria, though a country with huge potentials but deeply divided hence creating a blurred vision as to the path to greatness of this strategic nation – one with the largest black population on earth, resource rich, with a huge market and rich cultural diversity – all qualities of a nation that can take on the world.
On January 01, 2014, Nigeria will be 100 years old
as a nation but the pervasive question remains: who are we and where are we
heading? Granted, the celebrations may have different meanings to different
people; what with some saying there is no cause for celebration while others
are saying that the celebration is not about accomplishments but the enactment
of a ritual. The first school opines that the celebration is a waste of scarce
resources, or at best a way of siphoning money. This school of thought is of
the opinion that Nigeria still totters among the committee of Nations and being
a toddler at one hundred, the milestone should be spent taking stock and
bemoaning the failed leadership that got us to this sorry-state. The second
school sees the anniversary celebration more as an opportunity to celebrate our
existence as a nation given all the rough paths we have travelled as a nation
in the last One hundred years. This school cites the two coup-d-tats of 1966,
the Nigerian Civil War and the periods of Military interregnums and failed
attempts at democracy that dogged the last One hundred years while concluding
that despite these great socio-political tremors, it is a miracle that we are
still together as a nation. This school enthuses that nations that went through
less of these trauma have disintegrated or are still at war. They cite
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR, and Myanmar; and nearer home in Africa:
Somalia, Liberia, Sierra-Leone, Congo, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and a host of
others. To them, the fact that our democracy, though shaky, with Legislators
earning more than the United States President and doing nothing rather than
bicker over benefits, we deserve to celebrate. The fact that our economy though
failing, with banks not lending to the productive sector, with the industrial
sector almost comatose and the army of the unemployed rising by the day, we
still must celebrate. Here, the significance of celebration goes beyond
accomplishment, it is rather about our continued existence as a nation.
The second school, which I nick-named the
ritualistic school, sees more a need to decree our greatness through
role-playing as opposed to reality. Taking a cue from the early man’s penchant
for rituals which seeks to conjure reality through stylised plays, as seasons
and cycles come and go, while little or no explanation is given as to the
reason for the difference in seasons and cycles, and the celestial rather
than the existential is appeased and faith become more about inertia than
action. To this group, everything falls or rises without human
intervention but by a divine unction, akin to the big bang theory. This
group concludes that the path to greatness is in celebration.
- Taking a Shot at Nationhood - One hundred years After
While the school of reflection and the school of
rituals are at each other’s throat regarding Nigeria’s 100th anniversary, the
nation Nigeria must yet prepare for the future and in preparing for the future
use the opportunity of the 100th anniversary to begin to reposition our nation
by rising up to the challenges of building a modern nation state, one which is
audacious in its quest at greatness and competitive within the committee of
Nations.
The second question then is what path are we taking
in our second attempt at nation building? Because in One hundred years of our
existence, the world has moved on from the agrarian age that precipitated the
exportation of slaves to the new world from Africa, the industrial age which
led to the signing of treaties which ceded authorities of our erstwhile traditional
institutions to the British Colonial powers, to the age of Crude Oil which came
just before our independence , to the information age which came in the wake of
globalisation, I am therefore asking this question against the background of
a constantly changing global order. What this implies is that our
strategy starting out needs to also change in alignment with what is happening
around us. This is where knowledge comes in. We need to observe global trends
and ask questions as to our place in it. We need to develop our educational
system and make it more oriented to our development needs as opposed to being
just about certification. This is where imagination comes in, as without
conception, there can be no accomplishments. This reminds me of the space-race.
Starting with the United States and Soviet Union in the 100’s, with each
acquiring the knowledge required at conquering the space and putting their
imagination to work, it did not take long for success to come. Today, every
ambitious nation has caught the space bug with each either sending men into the
orbit or launching a satellite. Today, the world is different because of this
out-of-the-world knowledge and imagination. So where does this leave our own
dear Nigeria?
Indeed, I
have heard people say it will take centuries for us to catch up with the
developed world, but my response is always that it does not take time, it takes
will; the will to get on the road, the will to get our hands dirty, the will to
act! But what defines will, if not imagination, what defines imagination, if
not knowledge?
Let’s look at the Asian Tigers, Taiwan, Korea,
Singapore and the others in comparison with Nigeria. In 1960, we were all
classified as third world nations but by the 1980’s the tide had started to
turn what with the designation changing to emerging nations for the Asian
Tigers and Nigeria still keeping the tag “third world”. By the 1990’s the Asian
nations had taken the path of sustainable growth and were in fact, almost at
par with the developed world on the prosperity index and today, the talk is no
more about the Asian Tigers but about Brazil, Russia, India and China – what
has been rightly termed the BRIC states. Even with the current global
recession, these states are still recording quarter-on-quarter growth and are
fast catching up with the so-called developed world. What these examples point
to is that it does not take centuries to catch-up, it takes a virile strategy
based on knowledge and imagination and above all it takes collective will.
- Collective Agreement - The Path to Nation Building
A friend once said to me that the path to greatness
is arduous when a nation emerges outside of the consent of its constituent societies.
The friend goes further to reveal that before 1776 there was an American
society with affinity and engagements although under British rule unlike the
Nigerian situation where a nation was decreed based on British administrative
convenience rather than the agreement of the constituent societies. He enthuses
that it was the collective agreement of the American society acting under the
leadership of George Washington that led to the defeat of the British overlords
and the adoption of a collectively created constitution in the quest at having
an immutable union. In the Nigerian situation, there was first a Nigerian
nation before attempts at forging a Nigerian society, hence the constant
bickering about federal character and fights over the sharing of the
national cake as opposed to a collective agreement at baking a bigger and
better cake as was the case in the American context. Although critics are quick
to point out that despite the collective resolve at forging a nation in the
American context, there was a near succession by the Agrarian South from the
Union leading to the war with the Industrial North in what was known as the
American Civil war from 1861 to 1865. Critics went further to assert that if
this can happen about a hundred years after agreeing to come together, then Nigeria
may be on the right path to nationhood. The risk at taking this standpoint is
that it is always easy to cite the wrong examples. Back to my friends point,
nations rise to greatness on the platform of a collective agreement. Again
critics will point to diversity of cultures and religion, in the Nigerian
context, as being the bane behind the failure of a collective agreement citing
more homogeneous settings like China where a collective agreement was easy and
national cohesion and development had moved apace. Again this appears
a wrong thesis as culturally heterogeneous communities too had also
forged a collective agreement which has survived the test of time. America
being a good example, the United Kingdom being another and under the current
world order we see a further boost for diversity as a platform for progress in
the coming together of disparate states to form the European Union with a
single monetary union in mainland Europe. Back to my friend’s assertion that
for progress to happen, societies in coming together to forge a nation, must
have a collective agreement and this collective agreement can happen under a
homogeneous or heterogeneous cultural and religious setting. All it takes is
sincerity of purpose, a good sense of history and the will to agree to work
together for the common good. What this essentially means is that in the
Nigerian situation, development and progress can come through despite the
heterogeneity but the constituent societies must, outside the whims and caprice
of Lord Lugard, Sarah Shaw and their British masters, forge a collective
agreement which will chart a way forward for a bigger and a better union.
- International Relations under a Competitive Global Order
Having done a comparative study of the emergence of
nations, there is a need to look at the relationship of nations and the route
for development under a competitive context and this brings to fore the
question of Nation branding and its efficacy in the quest at nation building
under the current world order.
It is truism that with the advent of globalisation,
the world is becoming smaller, what with technology such as the internet
bridging the distance with international policies such as trade liberalisation
also creating access to erstwhile closed markets and creating a platform for
trade and tourism on a global as opposed to a local platform. With these new
developments, pundits have predicted the eventual death of the nation-state as
we know it today, what with the battle for control going beyond the local
context to a global scale. A look at the recent battle of the United Emirate
and Saudi authorities with Research in Motion, the makers of BlackBerry, puts
this new dynamics in proper context. Today, countries compete for control not
just through military strength but through the possession of competitive brands
which seek to dominate the scene globally. As these brands, be they physical
products or intangible ideas and notions travel the globe; the originating
state grows in economic and social status and gradually captures the global
imagination. Starting with Coca-Cola’s involvement in America’s military
expedition during the Second World War and the subsequent global domination of
the brand, other brands have also crossed international boundaries taking their
national platform with them. Over time, the strength of nations gradually
started to move beyond military prowess as the United States which orchestrated
this order grew in strength, erstwhile competitors who were initially ignorant
of this silent economic war gradually waned in global influence and economic
strength. Today, the path to nation building as become more complex as the
quest for global competitiveness be it in trade, technology, tourism and other
competitive advantage has increasingly become an issue. Nation states which
fail to understand this new dynamics run the risk of failure under the new
world-order. The current Chinese scramble for Africa is a virile example of
this new reality. The Chinese having woken-up to the reality of the new order
are voraciously taking stakes in Africa’s Agriculture and extractive industries
in order to support their domestic productive base in the quest at domestic
growth and global competiveness. Today, nation building has gone beyond forging
collective agreements, it demands the building and expansion of national
institutions such as road, houses, hospitals, sports facilities, hospitals,
political, legislative and judicial systems which can only happen with a
strong economy. The last Olympics in China and the recent world cup competition
which was hosted by South Africa is a big example of this new reality. Nations
having built internal systems can advance their local agendas by aspiring to
and attaining global relevance. This is because, in today’s reality, two dominant forces are driving the world toward a converging
commonality, and these forces are globalisation and technology. These forces
have radically redefined international relations and bringing to bear their
influence on global trade, tourism and sports and far from these, these forces
are affecting the way we see national economies, communication, transport, and
travel. It has made erstwhile inaccessible nations and poor countries eager for
development, domestic cohesion and given birth to the idea of global
competitiveness. This has resulted in a new commercial reality - the emergence
of global markets for standardised consumer products on a previously unimagined
scale or magnitude. Nations aligned to this new reality, benefit from enormous
economies of scale in production, distribution and marketing of their outputs
in return for national cohesion and sustainable progress and prosperity for the
greater majority of people within their local boundaries. By the benefits of
stressing global competitiveness in nation building, these Nations benefits
from the scale and scope advantage which the new global order confers as these
Nations using their national brand, are able to decimate
competitors that still live in the disabling grip of the old hypothesis of how
the world works.
From the fore-going, it is
evident that Nigeria and Africa are at the current sorry levels development
because of a lack of understanding of the current global realities and what
that means for local product brands and other intangible brand assets which can
be leveraged for global competitiveness and by implication, help quicken the
pace of economic and social developments which will consequently impact
nation-building.
Nigeria – The Quest at Nation
Branding
a.
Unconscious Positioning – “Giant of Africa”
Nigeria by her population
size, diversity, natural resource and positioning in the black world is
strategically primed to assume leadership status with the right internal focus
and alignment. However following the political crisis of the early sixties and
the period of military interregnum and failed democracy that followed, there
was disarticulation of objective and action in the quest at nation building as
successive governments worked in contra-distinction to what existed before them
and given the endemic corruption and wastages that came in its wake, it was
difficult to focus on the task of national rebirth and positioning.
However, in the earlier
epoch, following the discovery of oil in commercial quantity and the end of the
civil war, Nigeria enjoyed a period of economic boom which positioned her on
the sub-region as a big brother and buoyed by her then foreign policy which
made Africa the centre-piece of her focus, it was easily branded the “giant of
Africa” to the end that it concentrated on this extrinsic advantage at the
expense of her intrinsic value. To this end it readily offered assistance to
brother African nations at the expense of her internal development challenges.
Expressions of this course are her support for the liberation movements in
South Africa in the 1970’s and her support for peace keeping efforts in Congo,
Liberia and Sierra Leone in the 1990’s. Further to this was the Nigerian Technical
Aid programme where educated Nigerians in highly required fields were drafted
to educationally disadvantaged nations in need of skilled manpower in medicine,
engineering, teaching and other crucial areas. This programme initiated by the
Nigerian government was in support of the need for technical cooperation among
African Countries using Nigerian experts with the aim of promoting development
as well as institutional strengthening in Africa.
Given these
initiatives, the Nigerian nation brand built huge equity as a result of her
unconscious positioning as Afro-centric, caring and friendl
b.
The Search for Inbound Investment – The Heart of Africa
Following the restoration
of democracy and the drive for economic and political revival following years
of military dictatorship that made Nigeria a pariah state, the government of
President Olusegun Obasanjo, embarked on extensive foreign trips in search of
economic partnerships and inbound investments. However, given the new world order
which placed a premium on good infrastructure, democracy, the absence of
corrupt public institutions and open government as well as other competitive
advantages in deciding economic partnerships and investment options on the
globe, Nigeria made very little advances in the drive for foreign direct
investment. This precipitated a need for a new national positioning.
The quest for a new brand
image, one that is deliberately orchestrated with the intention of positioning
for economic benefits led to the emergence of the Nigeria image programme in
2004 under the direction of the then minister of information, Chukwuemeka
Chikelu saw the emergence of the “Heart of Africa” project which has as its key
thrust the need to project corporate brand Nigeria and by so doing sell our
unique selling point to the world. The project was intended to be sold through
a 360 degrees communication approach across the world.
With the exit of
Chukwuemeka Chikelu came Frank Nweke (Junior) who adopted this platform and
sought through the various road-shows which he carried out across Europe and
America, preserve the original idea while underscoring it with
Economic diplomacy. But given the fact that Frank Nweke came at the second half
of Obasanjo’s second term as President of Nigeria, he could not consolidate on
the work he had started before the coming of a new President, Umaru Yar’adua.
c. Yar’Adua and the Quiet Push for
Russian and Sino-Nigerian Friendship as Basis for International Positioning
The 2007 Presidential election came with wide local
and international condemnation especially from Europe and America and, as a
result of this, the new President could not advance Nigeria’s economic interest
with the West given the credibility problem which came with his election and
seeking a way out of this interregnum, he pushed for stronger ties with Russia
and China, while pushing for policies which gave increasing economic stakes his
new found partners at the expense of the west. To this end Gasprom, a Russian
Company moved to secure the Trans-Sahara Gas project ahead of British Gas which
was hitherto a front-runner. China also pushed for bigger stakes in the
Nigerian upstream Petroleum sector and the push to have the Petroleum Industry
Bill passed into law met with stiff resistance from European and American owned
Multinational Oil Corporations such as Shell, Agip, Mobil and Chevron, as it
was seen as a surreptitious way of ceding great stakes to China. The Yar’Adua
years, though short, saw a redefinition of brand Nigeria and with it came a new
selling proposition and a new brand association. Nigeria sought under Yar’Adua
to dilute her old legacy and chart a new cause away from it old Western masters
as Yar’Adua also built stronger ties with the Middle-East while the West
remained a distant influence. At the local front, things proceeded at a slow
pace and the need to have a rallying point around which the average Nigeria
could take pride was missing until the emergence of Professor Dora Akunyili (a
Pharmacist) as Minister of Information.
d. Dora Akunyili and Her Move to
Re-Write History – Enter the Nigeria Good People, Great Nation Project
With Dora Akunyili’s entrance came the “Nigeria Good People, Great Nation” brand
identity project the project which effectively put paid to the Heart of Africa project.
In terms of positioning, the Good People, Great Nation project sought to have an inside-out
positioning as opposed the Heart of Africa project which had an outside looking
in perspective.
On the communication side, the Good People, Great
Nation project suffered from a paucity of idea in terms how to drive a
clear-headed communication of what the project seeks to achieve and aside from
a few internal road-shows, the project scale was far too little for it to have
been effective. This was so, given the fact that unlike the Heart of Africa
project which had Presidential endorsement, the Good People, Great Nation
project did not have open Presidential endorsement as Yar’Adua maintained a quiet
distance from the project through-out the life-span of his Presidency.
Bolaji Okusaga is a Lagos Based Public Relations Practitioner
