…Presidency says they are beneficial
…They are waste of resources – Opposition
…Nigeria crises need external engagements – Economist
Each time President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s aircraft lifts off from Abuja, Nigerians are left weighing the cost against the promise.
Between January and August 2025, Tinubu has visited no fewer than 10 countries, some more than once, sparking a heated debate at home about whether Nigeria’s jet-setting leader is flying the country toward progress or simply away from its problems.
France, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates, Ghana, Tanzania, Italy, Saint Lucia, and most recently Japan are on the growing list. Some for international conferences, summits, state visits and private engagements.
The president is expected to stop over in the United States for an undisclosed reason before returning to Brazil again, his second trip there this year. For his critics, the frequency of these trips is not only excessive but also expensive.
Figures compiled by BudgIT’s GovSpend tracker show that in 2024, the Presidency spent over N23 billion to purchase foreign currencies for the international trips of top government officials, including Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima, and First Lady Oluremi Tinubu. That was a sharp rise from N18.63 billion in 2023, an increase of 23 percent.
At a time when millions of Nigerians are struggling with soaring food prices, a weakened naira, and worsening insecurity, the optics are jarring. Opposition figures have seized on this, accusing the president of turning foreign trips into “tourism diplomacy.”
“Amid the deplorable state of our nation in all ramifications, we have a virtually indifferent President who has continued to display insensitivity to our situation,” said Labour Party’s presidential candidate in the last election, Peter Obi.
“How can anyone explain that a President who came from Brazil recently and met with the President is returning to the same country, leaving the various degrees of challenges at home unresolved? Our President must know that he’s not a tourist, but the Chief Executive of a troubled nation, so he must have consciousness, strict work schedules and a strict travelling schedule to show that he has a troubled country to quickly return to,” Obi added.
The opposition coalition, African Democratic Congress (ADC) also weighed in, insisting that Tinubu’s constant shuttling might have been unnecessary if ambassadors had been appointed to represent Nigeria abroad. “For avoidance of doubts, all these meetings, even with the best of intentions, are not likely to yield any real benefits to Nigeria without ambassadors to follow up,” spokesperson Bolaji Abdullahi said in a statement.
Skepticism deepened further when, at the just-concluded Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD9), Nigeria’s booth remained empty while other African countries wooed investors. For many critics, it reinforced the notion that Tinubu’s travels were little more than photo opportunities and estacode-fueled excursions for his entourage.
Yet, the government insists these trips are strategic, not superficial. Yusuf Tuggar, foreign affairs minister, defended Tinubu’s active international engagements, describing them as opportunities already yielding trade, investment, and diplomatic gains.
“In the case of Nigeria, we have had engagements in the power sector. There’s a transmission project going on in Nigeria, being supported by this organ,” Tuggar said in Tokyo last week, referring to Japanese development agencies.
He added that Nigeria was beginning to diversify its exports to Japan, which currently stands at about $1 billion annually, driven largely by hydrocarbons.
“There is quite a bit of trade that is going on with regards to agricultural commodities, such as shea butter. Of course, some of it is even being processed in Nigeria. And then you also have cassava, and we’re looking to expand to what we refer to as acha,” he said, noting that the grain is in high demand in Japan.
For Tuggar, the real value of Tinubu’s travels lies in diplomacy. “There is the issue of the seat in the UN Security Council… there is the International Court of Justice, and there’s also the International Maritime Organization seat. So, these are all things that are happening here, and this is the sort of platform to engage,” he argued.
According to the National Bureau of Statistics, foreign direct investment (FDI) into Nigeria fell sharply by about 70 percent in Q1 2025, dropping to just $126.29 million from $421.8 million in Q4 2024.
Read also: Tinubu departs Japan for Brazil
Reacting to the figure in a statement on X, Obi said: “While the President, Ministers, and other government officials continue their global galivanting in search of FDI, our poor performance in key governance indicators, such as rule of law, regulatory quality, government effectiveness, and voice and accountability, continues to prove that you cannot attract sustainable foreign investment with poor leadership and governance.”
For Simon Samson, an Economics lecturer at Baze University Abuja and chief economist at ARKK Economics and Data Limited, the debate requires more than emotion, it requires measurement.
“To determine if these trips are yielding tangible benefits, we must rigorously track actual investment disbursements, commitments, and, ultimately, impacts on Nigerians in terms of jobs, projects, and infrastructure directly attributable to them,” he explained.
Samson acknowledged that Nigeria’s problems, economic crisis, persistent insecurity, poor infrastructure, weak rule of law, are urgent enough to justify external engagements, but only if the president can demonstrate results.
“Frequent international engagements can be justified if they are targeted at these problems and are result-driven. But there must be clear-cut progress to show for it,” he said.
He is also quick to highlight the costs. “There is an opportunity cost to this style of jet-setting diplomacy. Tens of billions that could be allocated to healthcare, education, and social safety nets are instead spent on globe-trotting. What actually attracts others to a country is societal stability, sturdy rule of law, security, and transparency. If the President can focus on these things at home, Nigeria would be better off than trying to convince others abroad.”
For many Nigerians, the question remains: are Tinubu’s trips sowing seeds that will take time to sprout, or are they costly distractions at a time when the country can least afford them?
On one side, critics paint the president as a leader who prefers the glamour of foreign capitals to the grind of governance at home. On the other, his administration insists that Nigeria must be present on the global stage to secure investment, trade, and diplomatic leverage.
Some other observers believe that presidential junketing would not convince any investor to come to Nigeria, but that the magic of “word of mouth” is always potent.
“You do not continue to globe-trot and telling people you are looking for investors. Investors know fertile environments to put their money in. If those already in the country are singing a good song, it will attract others without you needing to blow your trumpet. This is called the ‘word of mouth’ diplomacy. I wonder why our people don’t get it,” a critic said.
For now, the debate remains unresolved. What is clear, however, is that every takeoff from Abuja adds more pressure on Tinubu to prove that his frequent travels are not flights of fancy, but flights toward a stronger Nigeria.
