Cite this article as: Anaemene B. & Saidu S., (2026). A Tale of Two Former British Colonies: Nigeria and Malaysia Relations since 1965. Zamfara International Journal of Humanities, 4(2), 58-73. www.doi.org/10.36349/zamijoh.2026.v04i02.007
By
Benjamin Anaemene1
Saleha
Saidu2
1&2
Department of History and International Studies, Redeemer’s University, Ede,
Osun State
Abstract:
This study examines the nature and patterns of Nigeria-Malaysia relations since
1965. Despite the robust relationship between the two countries, the theme
ranks among the neglected aspects of Nigeria’s international relations. This
study, therefore, provides a deeper insight into the complexities and realities
of their relationship to analyse the benefits both countries have derived from
the cooperation. The study adopts the historical method. It relies on primary
sources such as oral interviews and secondary sources such as journals, books,
government documents, academic articles and other online materials. The study
has revealed that Nigeria and Malaysia have been cordial. It also discovered
that the cooperation focuses more on economic relations than sociopolitical
issues. The relationship has been beneficial to both countries. However, the
gains from the cooperation have not been fully maximised due to several
challenges, such as trade imbalance and transnational crimes, among others. The
study recommends that the governments of Nigeria and Malaysia should explore
more areas to strengthen their relationship.
Keywords:
Bilateral Relations, Nigeria, Malaysia, South-South Cooperation
Introduction
The
post-independence period ushered in new patterns of international cooperation.
Prior to this period, the levels of interaction were dominated by relations
between industrial countries and their colonial subjects. However, with the
attainment of statehood, these hitherto colonies transformed the interactional
landscape among states. It is therefore not surprising that bilateral diplomacy
in the form of South-South cooperation became one of the foreign policy goals
of African and Asian countries since independence. This is informed by the
belief that no nation can progress on its own, as it will always rely on
another country for resources it lacks.[1]
It
is generally agreed that bilateral relations can reflect several factors such
as shared historical backgrounds, shared borders, the impact of religious
groups and resource possessions, among others. This is true about Nigeria and
Malaysia. They share certain commonalities; both are plural societies, both
nations were former British colonies, producers of oil and are currently
democratic states. The historical ties between Nigeria and Malaysia date back
to the 1960s. Nigeria's First Prime Minister, Alhaji Abubakar Tafawa Balewa,
established friendly relations with Malaysia's first Prime Minister, Tunku
Abdulrahman. These interactions between the two leaders formed the basis for
economic, political, and socio-cultural cooperation between Nigeria and Malaysia.
Actually, diplomatic relations between Nigeria and Malaysia began in 1965.
Malaysia’s mission was established in Lagos in the same year making it the
first in sub-Saharan Africa. The High Commission was later relocated to Abuja
in 2006. Nigeria established its mission in Kuala Lumpur in 1991. Their early
engagements commenced during Nigeria's oil boom period, attracting
Chinese-Malay entrepreneurs who invested in various sectors of Nigeria's
economy. [2]
Foreign
Policy Objectives of Nigeria and Malaysia
Foreign
policy is an important instrument through which nations navigate the complex
web of international relations, pursue their national interests and engage with
the global community. It serves as a guiding framework for the country’s
interaction with other states, international organisations and non-state
actors, shaping its diplomatic, economic and security strategies.[3] In an increasingly interconnected
world, foreign policies of nations have far-reaching impacts, influencing not
just their bilateral and multilateral relationships but also their standing on
the global stage. Foreign policy consists of decisions and actions which
involve relations between one state and another.[4] It is an activity whereby a state
deals with other states, non-governmental organisations, and certain
individuals. It is usually formulated to meet the goals of national interest,
which in a real sense relates to those interests that are basic to the all-round
development politically, economically, socio-culturally and psychologically of
the country.[5]
Objectives of Nigeria’s Foreign Policy
Nigeria,
a significant power in West Africa and a key player on the African continent,
has experienced different stages in its foreign policy since achieving
independence in 1960. Nigeria's foreign policy encompasses all of its
engagements with the international community. The nation's foreign policy has
been shaped by its unique historical and political context, evolving political
dynamics, and the pursuit of national interests globally. The period following
independence marked the inception of Nigeria's foreign policy.[6] Throughout various administrations,
Nigeria's foreign policy has undergone significant changes. The military
regimes in Nigeria marked a shift in foreign policy focus. Nigeria's engagement
in regional and global matters varied during this period, reflecting the
priorities of the ruling military authorities. Under military rule, Nigeria's
foreign policy formulation deviated from formal procedures as policies were
enacted through Decrees rather than the constitution. Despite the adjustments
by successive governments in shaping Nigeria's foreign policy since 1960, the
fundamental objectives of the country's policy have remained consistent.[7]
The
inception of Nigeria’s foreign policy can be linked back to Sir Alhaji Abubakar
Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister and Head of Government. He
established the basis for Nigeria’s foreign policy. The country’s foreign
policy was stated in his famous speeches, preceding and following Nigeria's
independence. Those addresses consist of the House of Representatives on August
20, 1960, Independence Day on October 1, 1960, and his acknowledgement speech
when Nigeria joined the United Nations on October 8, 1960. [8] The primary aim of Nigeria’s foreign
policy is to advance its national interest. It serves as a cornerstone upon
which other objectives are founded. The core principles of Nigeria's foreign
policy under Tafawa Balewa encompass Non-Alignment, Legal Equality of states,
Non-Interference in other States' Domestic Affairs, Multilateralism, and Africa
as the focal point of Nigeria's External Relations. These principles were
integrated into the 1960 independence constitution and later into the 1999
constitution.[9]
Many
of these principles are still important and relevant for any country that wants
to maintain and defend its independence and sovereignty while still being a
respected member of the international community, even though some of them, like
decolonisation and non-alignment, are not as important as they were in the
1960s and 1970s. The national interest of Nigeria is reflected in its foreign
policy goals. Every foreign policy is a dynamic process driven by both internal
and external elements that converge. Therefore, safeguarding and advancing the
interests of the nation constitute the main objectives of Nigeria's foreign
policy.
Nigeria’s relations with Malaysia could be seen as a
reflection of one of the objectives of the country’s foreign policy. The
Fundamental Goals and Directive Principles of State Policy, outlined in Chapter
2, Section 19 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,
outline the objectives of the country's foreign policy. These goals include
protecting and promoting the nation's interests, promoting African unity and
integration, fostering international cooperation for enduring peace and mutual
respect among all nations, while combating all forms of discrimination.
Additionally, they involve upholding international law and treaty obligations,
and resolving international conflicts through dialogue, mediation,
reconciliation, and legal processes. Additionally, the foreign policy aims to
advocate for a just global economic system. Thus, the objective of fostering
international cooperation explains Nigeria’s quest for bilateral diplomacy.
Nigeria believes that bilateral diplomacy offers numerous opportunities and can
be leveraged to the country's advantage.[10]
Objectives of Malaysia’s Foreign Policy
Malaysia,
a country in Southeast Asia renowned for its diverse cultural heritage, has
adopted a pragmatic and multifaceted approach to foreign affairs since gaining
independence in 1957. The country’s basic principles and priorities include;
the respect for independence, territorial integrity and non-interference in the
affairs of other nations, peaceful settlement of disputes, peaceful coexistence
and mutual benefit in relations. Malaysia’s foreign policy seeks to promote
mutual tolerance and cooperation amongst all countries that make up the fabric
of international community. These foreign policy objectives have remained
unchanged in the evolution of its foreign policy from 1957 till today. The
nation's foreign policy is shaped by its strategic location in Southeast Asia,
its role as a key trading hub, and its diverse population. It is essential to
highlight that an effective foreign policy strategy should emphasise stability
and the nation's continual prosperity. The convergence of domestic and external
factors has impacted Malaysia’s foreign policy decision-making process.
Domestic determinants include the country’s broad history, socio-economic and
cultural factors. Regarding external determinants, it prioritises the international
and regional security environment, as well as political and economic concerns
worldwide.[11] These
domestic and external determinants contribute to shaping the nature of
Malaysia’s foreign policy and the conduct of the country’s international
relations. Malaysia’s appointment to one of the non-permanent member seats of
the United Nations Organisation Security Council can be perceived as a major
boost to its foreign policy, displaying its growing influence on the global
stage.
From
the days of Tunku till today, several leaders have played exceptional roles in
ensuring that Malaysia remains a sovereign and independent nation. Under the
leadership of Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad, who served from 1981 to 2003,
Malaysia’s foreign policy took a more assertive and independent stance.[12] Malaysia
pursues an independent, principled and pragmatic foreign policy, which rests on
values of peace, humanity, justice and equality.
Nigeria
and Malaysia have pursued different foreign policy goals that are influenced by
their respective aspirations for the global arena, historical backgrounds, and
regional dynamics. Nigeria has prioritised economic growth, regional stability,
and pan-Africanism. Its foreign policy engages international partners to
address global concerns while simultaneously promoting peace, security, and
collaboration within Africa. Malaysia, emphasises the concepts of neutrality,
non-alignment, and economic diplomacy in its foreign policy, which has been
shaped by its location in Southeast Asia. Malaysia actively participates in
regional organisations such as ASEAN and actively pursues good ties with all
nations. It also aggressively pursues economic relationships worldwide,
particularly in trade, investment, and technology areas.
The political transitions of Nigeria from
democratic governments to military regimes led to a disruption in her foreign
policy whereas in Malaysia, there have been no political disruptions.
However, the
advancement of national interests, the promotion of regional collaboration, and
the advancement of global peace and development are shared objectives between
Nigeria and Malaysia.
Economic
Relations
Economic
relations are crucial in moulding relations between nations. They serve as a
catalyst for fostering cooperation, promoting trade and investment and driving
economic advancement. In the context of Nigeria and Malaysia, two influential
nations in their respective regions' economic relations have been a cornerstone
of their diplomatic engagement, reflecting their shared aspirations for
economic development and prosperity.
As
a result of globalisation, economies are expanding and are becoming
increasingly dependent on the resources they lack. The economic ties between
Nigeria and Malaysia date back to the early years after Nigeria’s independence
in 1960. Nigeria and Malaysia’s bilateral relations began with the
establishment of friendly relations between Nigeria’s first Prime Minister,
Alhaji Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, and Malaysia’s Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul
Rahman, in 1965.[13] As
newly independent nations, both countries recognised the importance of forging
economic partnerships to boost their respective development agendas and
strengthen their positions in the global economy.
Bilateral Trade and Investments
The
economic collaboration between Nigeria and Malaysia is organised by the Trade
Office of the High Commission of Malaysia and the Malaysia External Trade
Development Corporation (MATRADE), based in Lagos. Globally, Nigeria ranks as
Malaysia’s 37th partner, with total valued trade as $956 in
2023. Nigeria is Malaysia's fourth-largest trade partner in sub-Saharan Africa,
after South Africa, Kenya and Cote d’ Ivoire and serves as its primary export
market. In terms of imports, Nigeria ranks as Malaysia's sixth-largest partner.
Both countries engage in oil production, with Malaysia being the world's
second-largest producer of palm oil and liquefied natural gas. Nigeria and
Malaysia also share similar climates, including tropical, swampy, and dry areas,
which enable them to cultivate similar crops such as rice, millet, yam, and
palm oil. Their early relations began during Nigeria's oil boom in the 1970s,
leading to an influx of Chinese-Malay businessmen who invested in various
sectors of the country’s economy. Consequently, trade relations flourished
between the two nations.
It
is significant to note that the bilateral relations between Nigeria and
Malaysia primarily focus on the economic and trade sectors. Some major products
exported to Nigeria from Malaysia include capital goods, consumer goods, fuels,
chemicals, food products, footwear, textile material, appliances, metals, and
plastics or rubber. Conversely, some major products exported from Nigeria to
Malaysia encompass capital goods, consumer goods, chemicals, vegetables, hides
and skins, among others. [14]
According
to the Malaysia External Trade Development Corporation (MATRADE), the total
bilateral trade between the two countries in 2018 amounted to USD 712.7 million
(rm2.864 billion). Malaysia's total exports to Nigeria during this period were
USD427.2 million (rm1.720 billion), while imports from Nigeria stood at USD
285.5 million (RM1.144 billion) in the same year. In 2019, the bilateral trade
between the two countries reached USD 699 million. Malaysia's total exports to
Nigeria in that year were USD485.4 million, whereas imports from Nigeria
amounted to USD213.6 million. In 2020, trade between the two nations increased
to USD 845,621,447 (RM 3,546,933,060) despite the impact of the Covid-19
pandemic on the global economy. The total exports to Nigeria during this period
were USD640,525,998.00 (RM2,685,577,378), while Nigeria's exports to Malaysia
were USD 205,095,449 (RM861,355,682) in the same year. From the data presented,
it is important to reiterate that if the instrument of the Joint Commission between
Nigeria and Malaysia is revived, and government agencies and private sectors
from both countries are fully engaged, there would be a tremendous increase in
trade and economic activities, which would help improve Nigeria's balance of
trade with Malaysia.
On
November 30, 1984, Malaysia offered to invest and assist Nigeria in its palm
oil production to achieve a self-sufficient economy. It was argued that the
country's future depended on its ability to be self-reliant in the long run
agricultural products suited to its environment. Furthermore, it was noted that
palm oil, which had previously been exported, was now being imported in large
quantities into the country. The importance of palm oil production was
highlighted as a priority of the Federal Government due to its food value and
health implications for the nation. There was also a visit by the Malaysian
High Commissioner to Nigeria to facilitate bilateral relations and aid Nigeria
in revitalising its agriculture, especially in palm oil production.[15]
The
Federal Government accepted Malaysia's desire to have direct trade links with
Nigeria on March 6, 1985. It was agreed that the trade links between these two
nations would foster a good relationship, eliminate the middleman role of
multinational companies, and fulfil the principles of South–South cooperation.
Since the government prioritised agriculture, Malaysia encouraged direct links
with Nigeria, specifically on agro–industries.[16] The
agreement also emphasised the need to halt the situation whereby Malaysian
products had to pass through the hands of Singapore-based brokers who passed
those products to Nigeria at outrageous prices. It was argued that direct trade
would ensure lower costs for buyers and reduce the dependence of primary
producers on the middleman services of multinational companies.[17] As a
result of Nigeria’s neglect of its other revenue yielding products like timber,
rubber, and cocoa due to the oil boom, it was argued that a return to land and
farming would help ease the situation.[18] Malaysia's
interest was to develop stronger trade and economic relations. As the world’s
largest producer of vegetable oil, Malaysia guaranteed bulk purchases of its
products to Nigeria at fair prices.
In
1992, a memorandum of understanding was signed between entrepreneurs from
Nigeria and Malaysia. It aimed to enhance business between the two countries.
The agreement resulted from a six-day visit by a 10-member Malaysian delegation
to Nigeria, during which they explored areas of economic cooperation and joint
ventures. The Malaysian team initiated the documents, which were endorsed by
the Nigerian Business Community. The delegation toured factories and
plantations, embarking on an extensive journey across the country to assess
business conditions, exploit raw materials, and identify opportunities for
joint ventures in Nigeria. The memorandum emphasised the necessity for
developing business and joint ventures in the management of timber, rubber, and
palm oil plantations, the production of rubber and tropical hardwoods, the
wood-based industry, and the manufacture of solar water heaters. Other
highlighted areas include the production of clay blocks for housing
development, ferrous and non-ferrous foundries using local scraps,
telecommunications, and the manufacture of electronics, household appliances,
and building materials. It also acknowledged the vast opportunities for
participating in the construction of real estate in the country’s capital,
Abuja, as well as other regions of the country.
An
agreement was also reached to ensure that discussions and negotiations would
take place to actualise the identified projects three months after endorsing
the memorandum. Nigeria pledged that the Nigerian Business Community would
pursue the agreement vigorously until it yielded profits, added value, and
generated employment. It was also highlighted that Nigeria possesses an
extensive reservoir of business resources that could be leveraged, assuring the
Malaysian delegation of profitable investment opportunities in the country.
In
2002, the Malaysian Palm Oil Production Council (MPOPC) expressed its interest
in exploring lucrative business opportunities in Nigeria. While Malaysia
demonstrated a willingness to assist in developing Nigeria’s oil palm industry,
it also conveyed its intention to export palm oil to Nigeria. The primary
objective of the MPOPC was to develop and promote a new market for Malaysian
palm oil and explore investment opportunities in Nigeria. The Malaysian team in
Nigeria has extended its support to enhance Nigeria’s palm oil production by
replanting trees older than 20 years. This occurred 40 years after Malaysia
acquired palm oil seedlings in Nigeria. During that period, Malaysia emerged as
a leading global producer of agricultural products, with an annual output of 11
million tonnes. The members in Nigeria aimed to secure the opportunity to be
the sole supplier of palm oil for a period of five to six years. Since Nigeria
had already lost its position as the world's number one oil producer, reviving
the palm oil sector became a vital focus for the government. Nigeria also
appealed to the delegation to explore various options regarding seedlings,
which might ensure a shorter gestation period. Additionally, Nigeria needed to
adopt Malaysia’s experience and expertise in palm oil production. This suggests
that, to address Nigeria’s issue of inadequate credit support for farmers to
enhance production, the practice of providing cash or seedlings should be
discouraged. Instead, farmers should focus on harvesting and transporting their
produce to government mills, with a percentage allocated to them later.[19]
Despite
Nigeria's abundant resources for vegetable oil production, the country still
imported $186.65 million worth of vegetable oil from Malaysia in 2001. During
that year, Nigeria brought in 74,658 tonnes of vegetable oil valued at
US$186.65 million (at a rate of US$250 per metric ton) from Malaysia.
Furthermore, Nigeria was a net importer of various vegetable oils from
Malaysia, Indonesia, and the ECOWAS sub-region under the ECOWAS Trade
Liberalisation Scheme (ETLS). Considering the formal trade data, the total
value of imports in 2001 was approximately 262,000 metric tonnes, amounting to
US$65.6 million (at a rate of US$250 per metric ton), which equals N8.266
billion.[20]
In
2003, at a press conference in Abuja ahead of the four-day African Ministerial
Forum on Integrated Transportation conference, it was announced that Malaysia
has made an investment of $1 billion (approximately N127.30 billion) in
Nigeria’s transportation sector. The investment in the country’s transport
sector infrastructure development was a result of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s
visit to the country.[21]
The
Cabotage Act was approved on 30 April 2003 by President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Nigeria secured a $300 million loan from Malaysia to kickstart cabotage
operations within the country. The implementation of the act commenced in May
2004 to promote the growth of Nigeria's tonnage while restricting the entry of
foreign vessels into domestic trade and inland waterways. According to the NMA,
the Nigerian government has obtained a $300 million loan from Malaysia to aid
local participants in the cabotage programme. This funding will be disbursed
through the national vessel financing scheme. The cabotage programme
exclusively registers companies permitted to transport crude oil from inland
waterways to the coast, enhancing the shipping capabilities of local companies.
The
National Maritime Authority (NMA), Nigeria’s apex maritime regulatory body,
held a session with the Agriculture Finance Corporation of Malaysia (AFFCOM)
group and various loan applicants from the Ship Acquisition and Ship Building
Fund (SASBF). The meeting took place at the NMA Headquarters in Lagos. For the
past two years, the AFFCOM group has worked tirelessly in collaboration with
the NMA to establish a partnership between Nigeria and Malaysia focused on
vessel and infrastructure funding. In this partnership, the AFFCOM group was
expected to arrange financing for Nigerian shipping operators through a
Malaysian bank. The Malaysian group nominated and negotiated with shipyards on
behalf of the ship owners to secure the most competitive pricing. It was also
anticipated that the group would locate and negotiate the best equipment for
the intended recipients of the loan to meet the requirements of Nigeria’s major
oil companies. It was mentioned that to purchase a vessel, Nigeria would need
to contribute 15% of the ship’s cost. [22]
As
admirable as the Malaysian lending facility appeared, it attracted various
opinions. To many, the Malaysian package resembled a Greek gift. In their
opinion, individuals could only be enthusiastic about the reforms if they fully
understood the motive behind the loan. Various industry operators believed that
through this arrangement, the Affcom group was not so much giving loans to
Nigerians as selling their ships. The argument was that the loan facility was
specifically designed by the group to attract capital to Malaysia by promoting
the nation's shipping exports.
As
the world’s sixth-largest oil producer, Nigeria has considerable maritime
potential. The Affcom group clarified that they were in negotiations with a
Malaysian bank to offer assistance and finance to Nigerian ship owners,
enabling them to take advantage of the cabotage law by acquiring ships for
business purposes. There was an assurance that Nigerians could comfortably
obtain the loan and still operate profitably, adding that, in the end, such
operators would eventually own ships without much stress, and that these
vessels would initially be built in Malaysia. However, many people remained
uncertain about the intended purpose of the Affcom group. The Malaysian loan
arrangement was intended to jumpstart wealth creation in the nation's
shipbuilding industry. Cabotage is a bill of rights that permits and authorises
Nigerians to take over shipping within the nation’s coastal area systemically.
In
2005, five indigenous Nigerian firms signed an agreement with a Malaysian
maritime business group. The federal government of Nigeria signed a $500
million contract with the Malaysian maritime business group for the development
of the nation’s fleet expansion capacities. The five indigenous firms listed to
benefit from the agreement with the Malaysian consortium are Ivory Marine
Limited, Fymak Marine, Doil Services Limited, Albain Ventures Limited, and
Radam Nigeria Limited.[23] The
agreement was entered into by the ministry with the Malaysian Exim Bank to
assist indigenous firms in acquiring their vessels and also enable them to
become acquainted with shipping activities. In this agreement, a financial pool
was established through a Public–Private Partnership (PPP), from which the
funds were accessed. The Fleet Expansion and Marine Infrastructure Development
Scheme was a departure from the former Ship Acquisition and Ship Building Fund
(SASBF), which had failed. Initially, the NMA budgeted $120 million through
SASBF. The authority later suspended the fund due to the default by many
Nigerians who had taken loans from it. [24]
It
is also worth noting that, to strengthen economic ties with Nigeria, the
Malaysian government established a trade office in Lagos in 2015, with the
primary objective of coordinating commercial activities between the two
nations. The trade office collaborates closely with the Nigeria-Malaysia
Business Council (NMBC). The NMBC functions as a private umbrella organisation
through which the corporate communities of both countries explore investment
opportunities. Consequently, there is an increasing need for a
government-driven platform for engagement between the two countries, which is
precisely why the Joint Commission was established.
The
economic relations between Nigeria and Malaysia have recorded some growth but
also face significant challenges. Despite advancements in trade and
investments, they are constrained by structural and institutional limitations.
However, there are opportunities in sectors like oil, gas, agriculture and
manufacturing. For Nigeria and Malaysia to fully benefit from their economic
ties, they must address challenges such as trade imbalance, regulatory barriers
and infrastructural deficiencies.
Socio-Political Relations
Their
relationship encompasses an interplay of social, cultural, and political
relations that has evolved. Their relations have been shaped by their
historical experiences as well as their cultural exchanges. Nigeria and
Malaysia have engaged in socio–cultural exchanges in areas such as education,
religion, sports, and ethnic diversity. Both nations share similar religious
contexts and are members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC),
which comprises 57 members aimed at promoting close collaboration and mutual
assistance among its constituents. The OIC is dedicated to upholding Islamic
values, promoting unity, and fostering solidarity.
In
Nigeria, the northern region is predominantly Muslim, while the southern region
has a larger Christian population than Muslims. Malaysia, despite its diverse
racial and religious composition, officially recognises Islam as its state
religion, as highlighted in the nation’s constitution. Nigeria is renowned for
its ethnic diversity, boasting over 250 ethnic groups that have significantly
shaped the country’s cultural heritage. Similarly, Malaysia is recognised for
its multicultural population, comprising Malays, Indians, Chinese, and other
groups. While Islam is the official religion in Malaysia, the societal
diversity allows for political freedom. Likewise, in Nigeria, individuals have
the liberty to practice their various religions without facing discrimination.
Malaysia
serves as a major hub for Nigerian students pursuing higher education. The
linguistic environment, specifically the English language, has facilitated
students’ cultural adjustment. The Malaysian educational system has been
attractive due to its affordability and high standards. Many Nigerians have
gained valuable experiences and knowledge during their studies, which has
enhanced their employability. About 15,000 Nigerian students have registered at
various Malaysian universities. Nigerians have served as cultural ambassadors,
spreading cultural understanding between the two countries.[25]
Nigeria
was one of Africa’s largest recipients of the Malaysian Technical Assistance
Programme (MTCP). Since its inception, over 100 Nigerians have been trained in
different fields in Malaysia. The MTCP offered courses for participants from
the government, private sector, and fisheries. Some Nigerians were also allowed
to attend the Second Global Forum and the Ninth Oil Palm Plantation Course held
in Malaysia. The main aim was to share its experiences and expertise on palm
oil production with Nigeria. At the second global technology forum,
participants included Nigerians from the banking and information technology
sectors. The forum was organised to share experiences and opinions on
communications and information technology.[26]
A
memorandum of understanding was signed between Nigeria and Malaysia. In 2004,
thirty cadets of the Maritime Academy of Nigeria departed on a 12-day training
in Malaysia. The training of Nigerian cadets aboard Malaysian ships was a
result of the unavailability of Nigerian vessels. The training was also as a
result of Malaysia’s extensive fleet. [27]
On
Monday, 11th September 2023, a memorandum of understanding was signed by Ahmadu
Bello University, Zaria (ABU), and Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM), Malaysia,
to jointly foster collaboration on consultancy and research of mutual interest
to both parties. The agreement seeks additional possibilities for academic
cooperation, which involve the exchange of academic staff and students, as well
as cross-training for both staff and students. The MoU is scheduled to last for
three years.
Sports
have served as a means of bridging religious, racial, and ethnic barriers among
various individuals across different countries. Nigeria, for instance, joined
the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) in 1960 and has
participated in multiple World Cups as well as other FIFA competitions.
Malaysia also became a member of FIFA and hosted the FIFA Under-20 Youth
Tournament in 1997. Nigerian footballers who have played in Malaysian leagues
at the grassroots level have helped facilitate the exchange of knowledge and
skills between the two countries.
Political
Relations
Bilateral
relations reflect several factors, such as shared historical backgrounds and
resource ownership, among others. Nigeria and Malaysia established diplomatic
ties in 1965. However, Nigeria fully established its diplomatic presence in
Kuala Lumpur in 1991 with the opening of its mission and the subsequent arrival
of the first resident High Commissioner. Nigeria and Malaysia share certain
commonalities. For instance, they are both plural societies, both former
British colonies, and both democratic states. The relationship between these
countries has been characterised by high-level visits, including state visits
by heads of state and government. They have signed bilateral agreements and
memoranda of understanding (MoUs).[28]
The
close and friendly ties between these two countries have been strengthened by
their membership in international organisations, such as the Commonwealth,
Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), D-8, Non-Aligned Movement, and the
United Nations, as well as through the exchange of visits by members of the
organised private sector from both countries. These countries share similar
views on global issues, such as disarmament, justice, freedom, women’s
empowerment, and the strengthening of South–South cooperation.
The
United Nations Organisation was formed in 1945 following the signing of the
Atlantic Charter. Due to the shortcomings of the League of Nations, there was a
necessity to establish a new international organisation to maintain relations
between states and promote peace. Nigeria and Malaysia are both members of the
United Nations and share perspectives on disarmament. They were part of a
delegation that presented a resolution on reducing the operational readiness of
nuclear weapons at the 67th session of the General Assembly First Committee.
These nations called for action to address the issue of atomic weapons being
accessible and ready to launch, which posed a threat to human survival and
international security. They argued that reducing the operational readiness of
nuclear weapons was crucial for minimising their involvement in military
strategies.
Nigeria
and Malaysia are both members of the Developing 8 (D8). These countries are
known for their economic strength and close religious and historical ties. The
D8 is an intergovernmental organisation that aims to evolve into a vibrant
economic alliance, fostering sustainable growth within its member nations while
also playing a significant role in global financial governance and
international economic collaboration. These countries operate in line with the
Istanbul Declaration, which emphasises cooperation among major developing
Muslim countries, all of which are part of the OIC.[29] The D8
also comprises countries that stretch from Southeast Asia to Africa. These
nations have collaborated to advance and support collective actions aimed at
attaining lasting social and economic progress by efficiently harnessing
economic and social capabilities. These nations have also focused on reducing
poverty and enhancing the quality of life for their citizens, increased private
sector engagement by fostering partnerships between chambers of commerce and
industry and have aimed to make a significant impact on the global economy that
aligns with the collective capabilities and potential of the D-8.[30]
The
G77 was formed on 15 June 1964, by seventy-seven nations that were signatories
to the Joint Declaration following the first session of the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Geneva. Initially comprising
seventy-seven nations, the G77 has since expanded its membership to include 134
countries. A permanent institutional framework began to take shape with the
group's inaugural ministerial meeting in Algiers in 1967, culminating in the
adoption of the Algiers Charter. This development led to the establishment of
G77 chapters in various locations such as Rome (Food and Agriculture
Organization), Paris (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization), Geneva (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development), Nairobi
(United Nations Environment Programme), New York (United Nations Headquarters),
and Washington DC (International Monetary Fund, World Bank). [31]
Although
Nigeria was one of the founding members of the G77, signing the Joint
Declaration of the Developing Countries, with Malaysia joining years later in
1989, these countries have collaborated under the Group of 77 to realise their
goals and objectives. These objectives include supporting southern countries,
advancing their collective economic interests, enhancing their joint bargaining
power on global economic matters within the UN system, and fostering
South-South cooperation. The G77 emphasises the importance of unity in the face
of diversity. Although these countries may exhibit various divergences in their
economic issues, social environments, and needs and capabilities, they are
united by their shared colonial experiences and their emergence as newly
independent states that require development.
The
Commonwealth was initially known as the British Commonwealth of Nations. It is
a confederation of independent and sovereign states that acts as the official
successor to the British Empire. Most of the states and dependent territories
of the former British Empire are now part of this lively organisation. However,
former membership in the British Empire is not a requirement for joining the
current Commonwealth. Nigeria and Malaysia are among its members. They have
worked together to achieve their goals by strengthening governance, promoting
human rights and justice, boosting trade, and enhancing the economies of member
states, while also addressing issues such as inequality, climate change, and
debt. The Commonwealth of Nations has collaborated with the United Nations to
pursue the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement
on Climate Change, encouraging collective efforts to tackle global challenges.[32]
In
1961, the Non-Aligned Movement was founded in Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The
Non-Aligned Movement comprised a group of countries during the Cold War era
that sought to maintain their independence and neutrality, rather than aligning
with the United States or the Soviet Union. The fundamental idea behind the
group was conceived in 1955 during discussions held in Indonesia during the
Asia-Africa Bandung Conference. The Havana Declaration of 1979 listed the
organisation's goals as defending the national independence, sovereignty,
territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries in the fight
against racism, neocolonialism, imperialism, and all other forms of foreign
subjugation.[33] Nigeria
and Malaysia are both members of the Non-Aligned Movement. Nigeria joined the
Non-Aligned Movement shortly after gaining its independence in 1960. As a
developing country, it has sought to advance its interests through the
movement, which advocates for international cooperation and multilateralism.[34] Malaysia
joined the Non-Aligned Movement in 1970. Malaysia has hosted various
Non-Aligned summits, including the 13th Non-Aligned Movement
Summit in Kuala Lumpur in 2003.[35]
In
1998, the Nigerian delegation attended the third meeting of the International
Steering Committee (ISC) on the Economic Advancement of Rural Women in
Malaysia. The first session of the meeting was attended by 16 first ladies from
Asia, Africa, the Asia Pacific, Europe, and America, and was chaired by
Nigeria's First Lady, Justice Fati Abubakar. The issues discussed during the
session included development and access to suitable technology, as well as the
management and conservation of the environment. During the session, a paper was
presented addressing the issues facing rural women in the country. The second
session emphasised the importance of micro and small-scale enterprises for
women, their families, and communities. The meeting also focused on mobilising
women’s groups for rural development through government organisations (GOs),
non-governmental organisations (NGOS), and the private sector. The main
objectives of the meeting were to review activities related to implementing the
general declaration for the advancement of rural women, through the sharing and
exchange of ideas and information on suitable technologies and other relevant
sources.
Nigeria
and Malaysia showed dedication in promoting a free and just global system.
These two countries also share an identity of views on several international
issues, specifically those pertaining to the struggle against colonialism.
Nigeria also commended the progress Malaysia had made since its independence
and its contributions towards maintaining long-lasting peace in South East Asia.
The
socio-political relations between Nigeria and Malaysia reveal a complex web of
interactions shaped by historical, cultural and political factors. Both nations
share certain commonalities. They are former British colonies, plural societies
and both democratic states. By fostering people-to-people connections and
dialogue, as well as high-level visits from the heads of government, Nigeria
and Malaysia can strengthen their bilateral relations and promote peace,
stability, and development in their respective regions.
Challenges
of Nigeria and Malaysia Relations
Although
the relationship between these countries has been cordial, they have both
encountered a fair share of challenges in their relations, which have, in one
way or another, put a strain on their relationship.
A
significant challenge in Nigeria and Malaysia's relations is the trade
imbalance. Malaysia has evolved from an agriculturally based economy to a
diversified industrial one. The Malaysian government has made various
investments in education and infrastructure, and has also attracted foreign
direct investment. This has resulted in the rapid growth of industries such as
automotive, electronics, and capital goods, which dominate the country’s
exports. Conversely, Nigeria continues to rely heavily on primary exports,
particularly oil. Nigeria’s exports are characterised by oil, which constitutes
a significant portion of its economy. This dependence has rendered the country
vulnerable to fluctuations in oil prices.
Malaysia
has been on the benefiting side, exporting more goods to Nigeria than it
imports. This is despite the significant increase in trade between the two
countries in recent years. Despite Nigeria’s vast human and natural resources,
the country has struggled to capitalise on this potential for sustained
economic development. This has hindered her ability to engage with Malaysia
from a position of strength effectively. Nigeria’s financial challenges have
hindered its ability to actively benefit from Malaysia, particularly in terms
of trade, investment, and cooperation.[36] The
COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 also affected the trade relations between Nigeria and
Malaysia. As a result of the pandemic, trading activities were restricted,
which reduced the importation and exportation of goods from these countries.[37]
In
Nigeria and Malaysia relations, there have been various instances of
transnational crimes. Transnational crimes are offences that have adverse
impacts across national borders and interstate crimes that violate the ethics
of the international community. Examples of transnational crimes include drug
trafficking, terrorism, human trafficking and so on. In 2008, two Nigerians who
murdered three members of a family in Kuala Lumpur in 1997 were sentenced to
death by hanging by the Malaysian federal court. [38] Similarly,
the Geneva-based World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) protested to the
Malaysian government over the arrest in January of 50 people at the
International Islamic University. Although 38 of them were released, the
remaining 12 were kept in custody and were accused of having links with
Al-Qaeda. [39]
Five
Nigerian students were arrested in Malaysia and detained over their involvement
in internet fraud amounting to N125.2 million (RM 2.4 million) in Selangor and
Kuala Lumpur. These five students were pursuing information technology courses
in Kuala Lumpur and were arrested on 30 June 2015. The governments of Malaysia
and Nigeria were also embroiled in a dispute concerning former militants who
had been awarded scholarships by Nigeria to study in Malaysia. Malaysia
contended that these individuals posed a security threat, claiming connections
to the Niger Delta militant group (MEND). In contrast, Nigeria asserted that
they were merely students seeking education in Malaysia. Despite 74 students
arriving in Malaysia to pursue their studies at Linton University College, the
Malaysian government kept a close watch on them to avert any involvement in
militant activities.
In
2011, the Malaysian High Court handed down a death sentence to a Nigerian
individual named Moses Nwosu for drug trafficking. He was alleged to have
trafficked 14.302kg of marijuana at a bus terminal on March 25, 2011. His
charges were based on Section 39(B) of the Dangerous Drug Act 1952, which
mandates the death penalty upon being found guilty. [40]
In
2019, about 73 Nigerians faced the death penalty in Malaysia as a result of
drug trafficking. Although Nigeria and Malaysia signed a Memorandum of
Understanding (MoU) regarding the massive influx of Nigerians to Malaysia, a
diplomatic note was sent to the Nigerian Foreign Affairs Ministry to urge its
citizens not to come to Malaysia for jobs, as there were no jobs available in
the country. To stop the influx of Nigerians to Malaysia, anyone travelling to
Malaysia would have to clear with the NDLEA.
There
have been various reports from Nigerian students regarding discrimination and
stereotyping by Malaysians, who often generalise the actions of a few Nigerians
involved in criminal activities to the entire Nigerian population. This has led
to the perception of Nigerians as criminals. The Malaysian media has also faced
criticism for projecting a biased and negative portrayal of Nigerians, with
their positive achievements seldom receiving coverage. This has further
contributed to the harmful stereotypes surrounding Nigeria.
The
ties between Nigeria and Malaysia have mainly favoured the government,
neglecting the formation of true partnerships with the people. Civil society
involvement has been largely overlooked, resulting in a minimal impact on local
communities. This situation has led to the blending of national and corporate
interests within certain emerging aid providers.[41]
A
significant challenge in the relations between Nigeria and Malaysia lies in the
inadequate implementation and lack of systematic follow-up. This inefficiency
has prevented ambitious proposals and promising initiatives between these
countries from mainly remaining theoretical. In their interactions, these
countries have emphasised the importance of fostering people-to-people
connections and high-level visits between their governments. Unfortunately,
these goals are yet to be attained, remaining only theoretical.
Malaysia’s
Development Success: Lessons for Nigeria
Nigeria
and Malaysia are both multi-ethnic and multi-religious, and both share a common
colonial history, having been ruled by the British. However, in spite of the
added strong similarities in climate and endowment in natural resources, these
countries have been separated by distances in geography as well as differential
development and orientation.[42]Although both
countries were considered as underdeveloped countries years ago, Malaysia has
been able to harness her resources under stable political leadership and has
become one of the emerging economies in the south. Although Nigeria was
instrumental in the economic development of Malaysia, the country has not been
able to attain stable economic growth and development. In terms of stability,
Malaysia had a continuous vision on the importance of economic growth and
development, a practical long-term strategy for implementing their vision and a
knowledgeable workforce comprising well-trained policy workers and other
professionals. The country made substantial investments in education and
training, resulting in a proficient workforce, a well-trained bureaucracy and
expertise in science and technology.
Macroeconomic
stability played a pivotal role in their development as they ensured that
public expenditures aligned with public revenue. Therefore, the government’s
deficit never mushroomed. Inflation rates were relatively low, and a gradual
depreciation in the exchange rate occurred, creating a stable financial
environment for private investments. Malaysia also viewed the private sector
goal as central to economic growth. It recognised the crucial role of the
private sector as a partner rather than a rival to be distrusted or feared.
This results in collaborative efforts between the government and the private
sector. [43]
They
also made significant investments in boosting agricultural output by backing
rural development, research, and extension activities, including the
introduction of fertiliser subsidies and support systems. This led to a notable
surge in agricultural productivity, laying the groundwork for reduced food
prices and increased exports. At a key point in their development, Malaysia
turned to exports as the engine for growth.
The
political structures in these countries differ. In Malaysia, the government was
perceived as the embodiment of the state and held legitimacy. This granted the
government autonomy to address national and long-term issues. The Malaysian
government utilised its authority to dispense favours and safeguard the overall
well-being of its citizens. On the other hand, Nigeria has been characterised
by political instability, which has crippled its economic progress.
Diversification is a crucial factor for development. Malaysia diversified its
economy, bringing about a shift from an agriculturally based economy to an
industrialised economy. This has facilitated their exports and has attracted
Foreign Direct Investments, resulting in economic growth. [44]
It
is important to recognise that for these countries' relations to be
advantageous and positively impact Nigeria's economy, the Nigerian government
needs to embrace the qualities and practices that have not only spurred
Malaysian economic advancement but have also sustained its progressive stance
in recent times.
Conclusion
and Options for the Future
We
have shown in this paper the nature and patterns of Nigeria’s relations with
Malaysia. The study establishes that the relationship has been smooth despite
changes in policies and methods over time. However, the benefits of this
collaboration have not been fully realised due to several challenges, including
trade imbalances, transnational crime, and misperceptions, among others. To
address the trade imbalance between these countries, with Malaysia benefiting
more, Nigeria must diversify its economy by reducing its dependence on the oil
sector, which currently accounts for the majority of its economy. The
diversification of products being exported would lead to a balance in trade,
benefiting not just one country.
There
is a need to strengthen their diplomatic relations; both countries need to
promote people-to-people connections and host cultural festivities, which could
enhance their views on the diversity of each other’s cultures. Malaysia should
also work on improving the welfare of Nigerian students who study in its
universities.
Both
Nigeria and Malaysia must rededicate themselves to exploiting the comparative
advantages and complementarities in their respective economies and adopting new
and innovative approaches in pursuing this objective. Nigeria can understudy
the leadership of the Malaysian government over the years and imbibe those
policies that have helped it to identify the way Malaysia should go and
consequently lead the people accordingly. Nigeria has much to learn from the
economic development of Malaysia and other booming economies. These lessons and
strategies can serve as valuable guidance. Thus, by addressing the issues
raised, both countries can work towards establishing a more resilient and
sustainable relationship that capitalises on their strengths and fosters mutual
growth and development.
Bibliography
1. Ademola, O. (1992, February 16). Learning
from the Malaysian experience. National Concord, p. 7.
2. Agaba, H., Nwokedi, L. O., & Adie, E.
I. (2018). Nigeria foreign policy since 1960: The story line and
analysis. Icheke Journal of the Faculty of Humanities.
3. Aruna, R. M. (2019). Non-aligned movement
and its relevance today. International Journal of Humanities and
Social Science Research, 2(7), 22.
4. Bello, I., Othman, M., & Sharifuddin,
M. D. (2017). An appraisal of Malaysia–Nigeria foreign economic
relations. European Academic Research, 5(1).
5. Bojang, A. S. (2018). The study of foreign
policy in international relations. Journal of Political Sciences and
Public Affairs, 6(4).
6. Commonwealth. (n.d.). Joining the
Commonwealth. Retrieved June 17, 2024, from https://thecommonwealth.org/about/joining
7. Daily Champion. (2008, August 4). 2
Nigerians to die by hanging in Malaysia.
8. Daily Trust. (2018, July 24). My take on
Nigeria, Nigerians–Malaysian envoy. Retrieved May 21, 2024, from https://dailytrust.com/my-take-on-nigeria-nigerians-malaysian-envoy/
9. Daily Times. (1985, March 6). Direct
Nigeria, Malaysia trade approved.
10. Edidi, E., & Ebikebina, S. (2019).
Challenges of foreign policy in modern diplomacy: The Nigerian example. International
Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 3(10).
11. Ebegbulem, J. C. (2019). Nigeria's foreign
policy: From the pre-independence and post-independence perspectives. International
Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies, 6(3).
12. Ezereonwu, J. (2003, December 10). Nigeria
and Malaysia to sign MoU in maritime business. The Guardian, p.
35.
13. Federal Department of Information. (1984,
December 1). Adigun received Malaysian envoy. Lagos.
14. Federal Department of Information. (1985,
March 6). Nigeria wants direct trade links with Malaysia. Lagos.
15. German Development Institute.
(2007). South-South cooperation: Opportunities and challenges in
international cooperation. Tulpenfeld.
16. Hill, D. (2003, February 24). World:
Non-aligned movement summit opens in Malaysia. Retrieved June 19, 2024,
from https://www.rferl.org/amp/1102321.html
17. Idiagbon welcomes direct trade links with
Malaysia. (1985, March 8). National Concord, p. 11.
18. Interview with Anonymous. (2024, April
18). High Commission of Malaysia, Abuja.
19. Interview with Ado Mujahid. (2024, April
18). Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Abuja.
20. Khalid, I. (2013). The developing eight:
Functions, challenges and prospects. IPRI Journal, 13(2).
21. Krupenya, I. (2023). Malaysia: Main
foreign policy priorities and bilateral relations with Ukraine. Consensus.
22. Levi, A. (2002, January 31). Malaysia
offers to boost Nigeria’s palm oil output. The Guardian, p. 72.
23. Makanjuola, S. T. (2015). Nigeria's
foreign policy. Abuja: National Open University of Nigeria.
24. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Nigeria.
(n.d.). Foreign policy. Retrieved June 25, 2024, from https://foreignaffairs.gov.ng/about-us/foreign-policy/
25. National Geographic Society. (2023,
October 19). Diplomacy. Retrieved May 23, 2024, from https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/diplomacy/
26. Nigeria imports $186m vegetable oil from
Malaysia. (2002, November 11). ThisDay, p. 4.
27. Nigerian sentenced to death in Malaysia.
(2012, August 27). ThisDay, p. 55.
Nigeria's
non-alignment policy | Meaning, history & origin. (2021, August 19).
StudyHQ. Retrieved June 19, 2024, from https://studyhq.net/nigerias-non-alignment-policy/
28. Oke, B. (2005, October 21). Ministry,
Malaysian group in $500m fleet expansion deal. The Punch, p. 22.
29. Okezie, C. A., & Baharuddin, H. A.
(2018). Economic crossroads: The experiences of Nigeria and lessons from
Malaysia. International Scholars Journal.
30. Olawale, B. K. (2015). Democracy and
development: A comparative analysis of Nigeria and Malaysia. American
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(4).
31. Punch. (2004, August 31). 30 cadets for
training in Malaysia. The Punch, p. 2.
32. Sandra, K., Osman, N., Akerele, K., &
Sakuri, O. (2023). Diplomacy among nations: The case study of Malaysia and
Nigeria. Asian Research Journal of Arts and Sciences, 19(1),
46–56.
33. Tash, M. S. (2013). Bilateral relations
among the developing eight countries. Universiti Malaya.
34. The Guardian. (2000, March 14). 46
Nigerians benefit from Malaysian training programme.
35. The Guardian. (2005, October 13).
Nigerian, Malaysian firms in $70b fleet expansion deal.
36. Tribune. (2010, March 8). Malaysia may
deport Nigerian terror suspects.
37. What is foreign policy? Definition, scope,
importance & more. (2024, February 24). Retrieved May 6, 2024, from https://jgu.edu.in/blog/2024/02/23/what-is-foreign-policy/
38. What is the Group of 77. (n.d.). Retrieved
June 17, 2024, from https://www.g77.org/geninfo/whatis77.htm
40. Yusof, Z. A. (n.d.). Economic
diversification: The case of Malaysia. Revenue Watch Institute.e.
[1]“Diplomacy.” National Geographic Society, October 19, 2023. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/diplomacy/# Accessed
23 May 2024.
[2] Sandra, Kayode, Nazariah Osman, Kayode Akerele, and Oladipo
Sakuri. “View of Diplomacy among Nations: The Case Study of Malaysia and
Nigeria.” Asian Research Journal of Arts and Sciences 19,
no. 1 (February 25, 2023): p46-56.
[3][3]“What is Foreign Policy? Definition, Scope, Importance
& More.” The Blog, February 24, 2024. https://jgu.edu.in/blog/2024/02/23/what-is-foreign-policy/.
Accessed 6 May 2024.
[4]AS Bojang, “The Study of Foreign Policy in International
Relations,” Journal of Political Sciences and Public Affairs 6,
no. 4 (October 18, 2018): p2.
[5]Agaba Halidu, Nwokedi Lawretta Obiageli, Adie Edward Idagu,
“Nigeria Foreign Policy Since 1960: The Story Line and Analysis,” Icheke
Journals of the Faculty of Humanities, (January 2018): p2.
[6]Edidi Eleonu, Charles, and Sharon Ebikebina, “Challenges of
Foreign Policy in Modern Diplomacy: The Nigerian Example.” International
Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science 3, no. 10 (October
2019): p660.
[7]Ebegbulem .C. Joseph, “Nigeria's Foreign Policy: From the
Pre-Independence and Post-Independence Perspectives." International
Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Studies 6, no. 3 (2019):
p1.
[8]Agaba Halidu, Lawretta Obiageli Nwokedi, and Edward Idagu Adie,
“Nigeria Foreign Policy Principles since 1960: The Story Line and Analysis,”
p9-10.
[9]Makanjuola, Shuaibu Taiye “Nigeria's Foreign Policy, “Abuja:
National Open University of Nigeria, (2015): p22-24
[10] “Foreign Policy – Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nigeria,”
n.d., https://foreignaffairs.gov.ng/about-us/foreign-policy/.
Accessed 25 June 2024.
[11]Interview with Anonymous, High Commission of Malaysia, Abuja, 18 April
2024.
[12]Krupenya, Iryna. “Malaysia: Main Foreign Policy Priorities and
Bilateral Relations with Ukraine.” Consensus (2023) p43.
[13]Bello, Ismail, Muhammad Othman, and Mohd Dino Sharifuddin. “An
Appraisal of Malaysia-Nigeria Foreign Economic Relations.” European Academic
Research Volume 5, no. 1 (April 2017): p751.
[14]Bello, Ismail, Muhammad Othman, and Mohd Dino Sharifuddin. “An
Appraisal of Malaysia-Nigeria Foreign Economic Relations, p752-753.
[15]“Adigun received Malaysian Envoy, “Federal Department of
Information, Lagos, 1 December 1984.
[16]“Nigeria Wants Direct Trade Links with Malaysia,” Federal
Department of Information Lagos, 6 March 1985.
[17]“Idiagbon Welcomes Direct Trade Links with Malaysia,” National Concord,
8 March 1985, p11.
[18]“Direct Nigeria, Malaysia Trade Approved,” Daily Times,
6 March 1985, p1.
[19]Levi Anyikwa, “Malaysia Offers to boost Nigeria’s Palm Oil
Output,” The Guardian, 31 January 2002, p72.
[20]Chikas Ohadoma, “Nigeria Imports $186m Vegetable Oil from
Malaysia,” This Day, 11 November 2002, p4.
[21]Oluyinka Akintunde, “Malaysian Investors Pool $1bn for Nigeria’s
Transport Sector,” The Punch, 10 March 2003, p1.
[22] Jane Ezereonwu, “Nigeria and Malaysia to Sign MoU in
Maritime Business,” The Guardian, 10 December 2003, p35.
[23]Babatunde Oke, “Ministry, Malaysian Group in $500m Fleet Expansion
Deal,” The Punch, 21 October 2005, p22.
[24]“Nigerian, Malaysian Firms in $70b Fleet Expansion Deal,” The Guardian,
13 October 2005, p4.
[25]“My Take on Nigeria, Nigerians–Malaysian Envoy,” Daily Trust,
July 24, 2018, https://dailytrust.com/my-take-on-nigeria-nigerians-malaysian-envoy/.
Accessed 21 May 2024.
[26]“46 Nigerians Benefit from Malaysian Training Programme,” The Guardian,
14 March 2000, p51.
[27] “30 Cadets for Training in Malaysia,” The Punch,
31 August 2004, p2.
[28]Bestoyin Olawale, Kareem. “Democracy and Development: A
Comparative Analysis of Nigeria and Malaysia.” American Journal of
Humanities and Social Sciences 3, no. 4 (2015): p70.
[29]Mohim Sheihaki Tash, “Bilateral Relations Among the Developing
Eight Countries,” Universiti Malaya, (2013): p62-63.
[30] Iqbal Khalid, “The Developing Eight: Functions, Challenges
and Prospects,” IPRI Journal XIII, no.2 (2013): p141-142.
[31]“What is the Group of 77,” n.d. https://www.g77.org/geninfo/whatis77.htm#:~:text=The%20organization%20and%20modalities%20of,who%20acts%20as%20its%20spokesman.
Accessed 17 June 2024.
[32]Commonwealth, “Joining the
Commonwealth,” https://thecommonwealth.org/about/joining#:~:text=The%20Commonwealth%20Secretariat%2C%20established%20in,promote%20justice%20and%20human%20rights.
Accessed 17 June 2024.
[33]Aruna R, Mital. “Non-Aligned Movement and its Relevance
Today.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research 2,
no. 7 (July 2019): p22.
[34]“Nigeria's Non-Alignment Policy | Meaning, History & Origin,,”
StudyHQ.net,” 19 August 2021, https://studyhq.net/nigerias-non-alignment-policy/. Accessed
19 June 2024.
[35]Don Hill, “World: Non-Aligned Movement Summit Opens In Malaysia,”
24 February 2003, https://www.rferl.org/amp/1102321.html.
Accessed 19 June 2024.
[36]Interview with Mr. Ado Mujahid, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Abuja, 18th April 2024.
[37] Interview with Anonymous, High Commission of Malaysia,
Abuja, 18th April 2024.
[38]“2 Nigerians to Die by Hanging in Malaysia,” Daily Champion,
4 August 2008, p1.
[39] “Malaysia May Deport Nigerian Terror Suspects,” Tribune,
8 March 2010, p51.
[40] “Nigerian Sentenced to Death in Malaysia,” This Day, 27
August 2012, p55.
[41]German Development Institute, “South-South Cooperation:
Opportunities and Challenges in International Cooperation (Tulpenfeld, 2007),
p3.
[42] Ademola Ogunlowo, “Learning from the Malaysian
Experience,” National Concord, 16 February 1992, p7.
[43]Okezie C.A. and Amir Baharuddin H, “Economic Crossroads: The
Experiences of Nigeria and Lessons from Malaysia, “International Scholars
Journal (2018) p10.
[44] Zaina Aznam Yusof, “Economic Diversification: The Case of Malaysia,” Revenue Watch Institute, p1-2.
0 Comments