‎Nigeria and Double Standards: The Diplomatic Contradiction In Supporting Palestine While Condemning Somaliland's Self-Determination

 ‎Nigeria and Double Standards: The Diplomatic Contradiction In Supporting Palestine While Condemning Somaliland's Self-Determination ‎ ...

 ‎Nigeria and Double Standards: The Diplomatic Contradiction In Supporting Palestine While Condemning Somaliland's Self-Determination

‎

‎Following the historic recognition of Somaliland's statehood by the State of Israel on 26th December 2025, Nigeria's contradictory diplomatic approach to self-determination has attracted significant global scrutiny, as it joins some countries in the subsequent rejection and condemnation of the recognition.

‎

‎This global scrutiny came at the backdrop of Abuja being consistently championing Palestinian statehood and autonomy at international forums for over a year, yet aligned itself to opposing the recent Israel's recognition of Somaliland's independence. This diplomatic double standard raises questions about the principles guiding Nigeria's foreign policy decision making process.

‎

‎ Just last year, December 2024, Nigeria voted at the United Nations in support of Palestinian rights to Self-determination, reinforcing its foreign policy position that Palestinians deserve self-determination and an independent state. Nigerian officials argued that their support for Palestine were framed from a moral standpoint, rooted in the principles of justice and the right of Palestinian people to determine their own political future.

‎

‎Yet this stance appears conspicuously absent when it comes to repeating same and standing with Somalilanders. This diplomatic contradiction further complicates Nigeria's relationships with other nations who are neutral on the Israeli recognition of Somaliland's independence, especially with emphasis on the potential implications of condemning or recognizing Somaliland's self governance. 

‎

‎Political concerns such as: Setting a precedent for secessionist movements within its own borders; The Biafra question, and a desire to maintain regional and continental influence in Africa has been identified as key factors influencing Nigeria’s foreign policy decisions. Yet, this double standard comes at the cost of losing moral stance to further the Palestinian statehood and tainted international image.

‎

‎Nigeria's history with Biafra, especially regarding the Biafran genocide of 1967-1970 has left deep scars on its national psyche and foreign policy positions. Recognizing Somaliland's statehood in Africa opens uncomfortable conversations about Nigeria's own Biafra's IPOB separatist movement. The paradox which Nigeria avoids is that supporting Israel and the statehood of Somaliland will create a precedent of accepting Biafra's statehood which threatens Nigeria's statehood.

‎

‎This selective application of self-determination principles undermines Nigeria's moral authority on the international stage. It underscores that Abuja's support for Palestinian statehood last, year's December, was driven more by religious solidarity with the Muslim world and political convenience than by genuine commitment to universal principles of justice and international right for self-determination.

‎

‎The hypocrisy is particularly stark, given that both Palestinians and Somalilanders cite historical grievances, and the right to escape oppression as justifications for their independence aspirations. Both peoples have demonstrated administrative capabilities and sought international support for self-governance, yet Nigeria chooses who to support and who to condemn.

‎

‎Until Nigerian policymakers reconcile these diplomatic contradictions, stand firm on recognizing international law and right to Self-determination, accusations of hypocrisy, double standard to international laws and treaties will continue to expose the decay in Nigeria's foreign policy initiatives, while further diminishing its image, influence and moral standing to participate in global affairs.

‎

‎

‎Family Writers Press International