That Ambassador Adeniji May Live On!

INTERNATIONAL STORY With Bola Akinterinwa

Ambassador Oluyemi Adeniji, CON, was a career diplomatist, who served as Nigeria’s Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador to Austria, France and Switzerland. His services to the Nigerian state and people were not simply extraordinary in performance but also with full powers in terms of accreditation and international representation. He was fully acknowledged at home and abroad for his integrity and sincerity of purpose when he was alive. This meant that he enjoyed the full trust of both the sending and receiving states to which he was accredited.

For instance, at the Nigerian level, he was appointed the Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1991 and given the national honour of Commander of the Order of the Niger in 2001. In 2003, he was appointed the Minister of Foreign Affairs and in 2006, the Minister of Interior. At the international level, he reflected truly that charity begins at home. In this regard, he carried abroad his character of dint of hard work, generally characteristic of the Ijebu people, his unreserved patriotism largely predicated on the fear of God, and his negotiating skills that are also largely defined by objectivity of purpose.

His general attitudinal disposition as a diplomat, diplomatist, and international functionary, is acknowledged internationally and remains a source of sweet inspiration. He was the President of the United Nations Conference on Certain Conventional Weapons from 1979 to 1980 and Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee at the United Nations Second Special Session Devoted to Disarmament in 1982. More important, he was appointed in 2008, the Special Envoy of the Chairperson of the African Union Commission for the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement. He was also the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General and Head of the United Nations Peacekeeping Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) in 1999.

Without scintilla of doubt, Ambassador Oluyemi Adeniji, though born locally in Ijebu Ode, Ogun State, in 1934, was truly a citizen of the world. The blood that ran in his capillaries was multilateralist. His thinking was globalist and peace-seeking. His attitudinal disposition was always defined by the five main principles of peaceful co-existence. His negotiating strategy was clothed with perseverance and relentlessness. And perhaps most interestingly, his operational word for any action was always identification of which and in whose interest was a diplomatic action. This same national and international civil servant passed on to glory on November 27, 2017 in London. It is in acknowledgement of his life well spent that people who are peace keepers are mourning his passing away in a manner truly compatible with best diplomatic practices.

Put differently, several activities were organised as part of his obsequies. The first was the launch of The Ambassador Oluyemi Adeniji Foundation for Strategic Studies and Conflict Resolution (TAOAF-SSCR) on Tuesday, 23rd January, 2018 at the Eko Hotels and Suites, Victoria Island, Lagos. It was established to reflect the values for which Ambassador Adeniji stood when he was alive: ‘integrity, fairness, and compassion.

The Foundation has an interesting operational methodology: a dynamic think-tank approach, which will be made results-oriented by providing ‘a platform for global leaders in diverse fields to fashion out pragmatic solutions to the world’s most pressing and/or seemingly intractable issues.’ And perhaps, most interestingly, ‘this will be done using inter-generational experience, expertise and passion at periodic symposia, workshops, master classes, etc, to be hosted by the Foundation. At the end of each event, the central ideas advanced therein will be crystallised into a position paper. This will be shared with the Federal Government of Nigeria and relevant international bodies.’

The application of this methodology took effect immediately with a symposium organised to mark the inauguration of the TAOAF-SSCR. The symposium had as theme: ‘Bridge-building in Response to Violent Extremism.’ It was chaired by a veteran and seasoned journalist, Mr. John Momoh, the Chairman of the twelve-time best television awards winner. Mr. Segun Adeniji, one of the children of Ambassador Adeniji, served as the moderator of the discussions.

There were two lead speakers. The first was Dr. Chris Stout, a clinical psychologist, Founding Director of the Centre for Global Initiatives, and former Visiting Professor at Rush University. Sheikh Muhammad Dawah Institute of Nigeria, as well as Trustee and Member of the Senior Management Board of the Islamic Education Trust, was the second lead speaker.

Mr. John Momoh appreciated the importance and relevance of the theme of the symposium, particularly its consistency with the philosophy of Ambassador Adeniji regarding conflict resolution and peace building. He posited that Ambassador Adeniji preferred consensus building to conflict. He stood for pluralism and diversity. More important, he reminded everyone of the greater virtue in peacemaking and the challenge of the deepening tensions in the world of today, and therefore, the essence for an urgent response and timeliness of both the founding of the Foundation and the theme of the symposium.

Sheikh Nurudeen Lemu noted that neither violent extremism nor religious extremism was new. What should be noted was that extremists see themselves as reformers and not as extremists. Consequently, any analytical effort at understanding the problem will need to first look at the context of each act of extremism. This means that no single solution fits all. More important, he gave the stories of the potholes and the example of leadership in Nigeria: when there is a problem, leaders look out through the window to blame others. But when there is credit to take, they look at the mirror to see themselves.

Dr. Stout underscored the psychology of terrorism and therefore the need to approach the quest for solutions to violent extremism from a multidimensional approach. In this regard, he suggested the use of civil society organisations as a medium for discussions on the matter, particularly for purposes of advocacy, training, promotion of community resilience. He noted that government had failed and had left the faith leaders to take over the responsibility of peace-making. In his eyes, government should provide the required good environment for the culture of peace to evolve. Ambasador Olusegun Akinsanya shared this view and suggested the inculcation of education as an instrument of peacemaking in the curriculum of schools, as well as the need to fletch out the contents of the areas of strategic studies and conflict resolution to be focused on by the TAOAF-SSCR.

The crux of the discussions at the symposium focused on God and gods, on the one hand, and leadership in Nigeria, on the other hand. Few people had the opportunity to speak from the floor: Mr. Ayo Adeniji, Ambassador Wole Coker, Ambassador Segun Akinsanya, and Ambassador Ayo Olukanni. Momoh raised the issue of all of us having a common devil but many gods. Sheikh Lemu argued that there is only one God but different conceptions of the same God. While Dr. Stout posited that the trust and the education of today is not and cannot be a solution to prejudice, simply because we all like learning but do not want to be taught.

Momoh shared this view differently by suggesting that leadership is a major problem in Nigeria and that there is a need for a new crop of leadership in the country. He noted that the recruitment of youth for purposes of violent extremism is easy, because of their neglect for a long period in development policy calculations. In this regard, Ayo Adeniji considered that the provision of education on the implications of violent extremism at the early stage of primary education can go a very long way in shaping the viewpoints of pupils and preventing violent extremism. In other words, there is the need to catch them young before they grow up into becoming agents of societal ills.

For the adults that already have their own worldview, Ambassador Coker suggested that the Adeniji Foundation should be sustained on a permanent basis as an instrument for the propagation of peaceful values. He explained that the basics of good neighbourliness had been completely destroyed and therefore, the teaching of values common to both Christians and Muslims should be underscored and taught. Ambassador Ayo Olukanni looked at the issue from the perspective of the extent to which there had been progress at the level of the interfaith dialogue in Nigeria, Christians’ commitment to the prosperity theory, and the Muslims saying Allak hubaru in Bethlehem.
Answers to various questions and observations made at the symposium were difficult. Dr. stout even admitted that the issue was very complex and therefore opted to leave Nigeria with the hope that the brilliant people in Nigeria would offer to take the foundation to higher levels in addressing the problems of the future.

Responding to this challenge, Sheikh Lemu advised on the use of language by media professionals. For instance, he explained that the word ‘crusade’ is being used to refer to fighting Muslims in the Holy Land, but it is being reviewed today. ‘Jihad’ is also being used in the context of revival. Consequently, media houses were advised to be more cautious of the language they use and should seek to underscore and repeat condemnations of violent extremism. Sheikh Lemu also drew attention to the fact that 70% of Boko Haramists are not married and that 47% of the members have no parents or have single parents. As such, ease in recruitment of young people is self-explanatory.

The Foreign Policy Dimensions
Apart from the symposium, two foreign policy issues were raised at the Commendation Service, held on Wednesday, January 24, 2018 at Our Saviour’s Church, Tafawa Balewa Square, in the Anglican Communion of the Diocese of Lagos, and at the Funeral Service conducted for Ambassador Adeniji on Thursday, January 25, 2018 at the Ijebu Anglican Diocese Cathedral Church of Our Saviour, Ita-Olowajoda, Ijasi, Ijebu-Ode.

At the commendation service in Lagos, the sermoner asked all those present in the church whether they were preparing for eternity. The sermoner asked this question in light of his strong belief that, no matter how long one lives, one must die. And because one cannot escape death, the need for everyone to set his or her priorities right cannot but be a desideratum.

More interestingly, the sermoner submitted that many people go to church, but without knowing why, without having Jesus Christ in them, and without thinking about eternity. This, the sermoner considered, was most unfortunate, because the second coming of Jesus is nearer than ever imagined. He said the world was already gradually coming to an end. He explicated this within the framework of Israelo-American foreign policies. As explained by the sermoner, Donald Trump of the United States had made clear his intention to defend the Jews and their interests. This implies that any Jewish policy stand has the potential support of the United States.

Additionally, the sermoner reminded that Israel was reported to have taken over the Mosque in Jerusalem. He appeared to be referring to the ‘al-Aqsa silver-domed Mosque inside the 35-acre compound referred to as al-Haram, al-Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary, by Muslims, and as the Temple Mount by Jews. The compound, in an attempt to find a lasting peace in the Middle East, and particularly enduring resolution of the Israelo-Arab conflict, has been designated a World Heritage site by the UNESCO. The compound lies in the Old City of Jerusalem.

However, Israel has reportedly been making life very difficult for the Palestinians, numbering about 400,000, who were born and living in Jerusalem, but who were only given permanent residency status rather than citizenship, and by not only effectively controlling, but also Judaising the Old City and the whole of East Jerusalem. Israel is on record to have built not less than 12 well-fortified Jewish-only illegal settlements in East Jerusalem in which more than 200,000 Israelis live.

Besides, the Israeli takeover of the Mosque can also be explained and understood within the context of the significance of the Mosque: the Muslims see it as Islam’s third holiest site and the Dome of the Rock, as a seventh-century structure, where Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven. For the Jews, the compound is where the Biblical Jewish temples once stood ‘but Jewish law and the Israeli Rabbinate forbid Jews from entering the compound and praying there, as it is considered too holy to tread upon’ (vide http://www.aljazeera, 6 December, 2017).

What is particularly noteworthy is that, in 1967, Jordan and Israel agreed that the Islamic Trust would be responsible for administration of whatever happens within the compound but the Israelis would have control over external security of the compound. Probably as a result of this agreement, Israeli security forces have been controlling and even restricting the access of Palestinians to the compound. In fact, in July 2017, there was a violent attack within the compound, in which not only Palestinians were killed but also two Israeli security men. This prompted the takeover of the compound by the Israeli authorities which angered the Arabs and to which the sermoner referred.

The reference by the sermoner is to suggest that, sooner than later, when the new Church and Jerusalem would have been re-built, Jesus Christ will come back again and when He arrives, under what and which conditions will He find the congregants? The Donald Trump administration has made it clear that it would be moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by end of 2019. Will others follow? Will the Old City cease to be a World Heritage? Will there be a clash of interest between the global community and the second coming of Jesus Christ? These are some of the foreign policy dimensions raised in the context of the celebration of life of Ambassador Adeniji, an apostle of peace.

At the funeral service in Ijebu-Ode, the sermoner also asked two questions: ‘whose ambassador are you? As ambassador, who are you representing? The questions are again much thought-provoking for various reasons. First, the sermoner drew attention to Ambassadors of Christ as contained in 2 Corinthians 5: 20. This passage says ‘now then, we are Ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.’ Secondly, many ambassadors of, and not for, Nigeria were present in the church. They included Ambassadors Olu Sanu, B.A. Clark, E.O. Fowora, Segun Apata, Dapo Fafowora, Ononaiye, Kunle Adeyemi, and Brownson Dede, all of them career Ambassadors of Nigeria. They are not Ambassadors for Nigeria.

It is important to differentiate between an ‘Ambassador of Nigeria’ and an ‘Ambassador for Nigeria,’ especially in the same way a clear distinction between Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of State for Foreign Affairs is made. A Minister of Foreign Affairs has responsibility for all international questions and relations. A Minister of State has a well-defined responsibility, which is limited in scope. Even if he sits in the meetings of the Executive Council and is also adjudged to be a full minister, his status is still defined by the scope of responsibility.

In the same vein, an Ambassador of Nigeria always represents the Head of State in the protection of the national interest. In doing so, his responsibility is not in any way limited. This is why they are considered as plenipotentiaries. Plenipotentiary is the English word for its original French diplomatic word, plénipotentiaire, that is, ‘muni de plein pouvoirs,’ meaning ‘with full powers.’

In the letter of credence accrediting Ambassador Oluyemi Adeniji as Ambassador of Nigeria to France, the President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, ‘nominated, constituted, and appointed him to be his (Mr. President) Ambassador, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary in Paris for the purpose… of representing the interests of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Thus, if an ambassador has the necessary full powers to act and represent his president in the advancement of the national interest in the receiving state, to what extent can this help in the long run any ambassador in the context of Ambassadors for Christ? In the first instance, an Ambassador of Nigeria must have been initially accredited, that is, he must have gone through the processes of agrément and presentation of his two Letters of Accreditation (first is about recall of the current ambassador; the second is about the Replacement of the recalled ambassador with the Ambassador-designate).

When we compare an Ambassador of Nigeria with full powers of representation with an Ambassador for Christ with the mandate of evangelisation, the basic challenge of accreditation cannot but also be raised: who has the right of accreditation? To which authority or people is the accreditation of an Ambassador for Christ? Which are the functions specifically earmarked for Ambassadors for Christ? These questions enable us to understand the essence of the message the sermoner in Ijebu-Ode wanted the congregants to take home.

While the Ambassadors of Nigeria are nominated by the President of Nigeria, Ambassadors for Christ are basically self-nominated after they might have reconciled themselves with Christ. They may go to schools of theology for spiritual knowledge empowerment after which they can competently spread the Gospel. According to the sermoner, everyone is an ambassador, and for that matter, at various levels.
As much as we agree that everyone is an ambassador and should also be an Ambassador for Christ, great care should also be taken in the usage of the word as a complimentary title. In Nigeria, there is always the tendency to bastardise titles and concepts. For instance, only career diplomats, who attain the level of an ambassador can answer the title of an ambassador in diplomatic practice.

When non-diplomatic careerists are accredited as ambassadors, they also legitimately answer the name and title of an Ambassador. However, when they are recalled and are no longer in the diplomatic service, they cannot rightly answer the name ambassador.
‘Ambassador’ is a professional title that is worked for and also earned. It is not honorary. It can be given to diplomatic careerists who have served well as Foreign Service Officers but have not been accredited to a foreign country. In this regard, they are called Ambassadors in situ, or again, to Foreign Service Officers, who may be accredited but do stay in their sending home states.

In Nigeria, people are given honorary doctorate titles but the titles are turned into professional titles and used as if they are professionally worked for. Even, many people go to theological schools for one academic session, without any university degree, and yet, they are conferred with ‘doctorate degrees.’ They not only insist on being called doctor this and doctor that, but also quarrel when they are not so called. This type of mentality must not be taken to the foreign policy level, when considering who is an ambassador, be it of Nigeria or for Christ. Even though the federal government can be said to have been bastardising the parameters for appointment of Ambassadors of Nigeria, the parameters for the appointment of Ambassadors for Christ, because this is more important for purposes of eternity, can borrow a leaf from the factors considered in appointing ambassadors in the past in the time of Ambassador Adeniji.

In the words of the President, ‘I, reposing special trust and confidence in the discretion and faithfulness of my Trusty and Well-beloved Oluyemi Adeniji’, the factors are trust, discretion, and faithfulness. More importantly, the President nominated him in recognition of his ‘approved wisdom, loyalty, diligence and circumspection.’ It is not everyone that qualifies to be an Ambassador for Christ. And if everyone is, there will not be anybody to be preached to.

As the sermoner wants everyone to know, being an Ambassador of Nigeria is good but cannot be good enough without also becoming an Ambassador for Christ because of life after death, because of eternity, because the world is coming to an end and because it will not profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul. This was the epicentral message generally underscored in all the activities organised to celebrate the Passing Away to Glory of Ambassador Adeniji, a diplomatic functionary per excellence. It is well with his soul. Adieu!