Views from Nigeria: Africa in a Shifting World Order - Kayode Fayemi - Eyes on Middle Powers Eps. 5

Dr. Fayyami, many countries in the global south, particularly the middle powers, like to use this term balancer or balance.

It's rooted in our historical events and circumstances.

But if you compare from, say, 70 years ago, back then during our Bandung conference, and then also today, The way we use balancer might be different back then and now.

Back then, it was out of weaknesses or out of insecurity.

Maybe not weaknesses, but insecurity that great powers contestation.

But today, it's out of more confidence, greater confidence, and it's more coming out of strength that we need to be in our autonomy today.

to balance out these relations with the great powers and the need to maintain our independence.

And how do you see it is the case in Nigeria and perhaps in Africa also when it comes to this term balance? And perhaps if I can say also the term strategic autonomy has become increasingly used nowadays, particularly by the Global South and the middle powers.

Well, What I see, maybe I'm being overly optimistic, is that the future of the globe belongs to the middle powers, to the balancers and the... bridge builders, countries that are sufficiently independent to maintain their own position and autonomy on issues of importance, but countries that also have the capacity to become co-rulemakers rather than rule takers, which a lot of countries in the world are categorized as.

So, I mean, we're dealing with systems.

The world itself is a system.

Which role do we want to play in it as countries that are desirous of strategic autonomy? Do we want to be system influencers? Or Do we want to be system non-effectors? And I believe many of us categorized as balancers or middle powers want to at least be system influencers, even if we cannot be system changers.

And that's what informs the importance of a consortium, if you like, of such similar countries, middle powers, that can help to continue to maintain the stability of the globe.

It so happens that such powers are not just limited to the global South, although as a country from the global South, we're particularly interested in the role that the global South will play.

You also have such countries in the global North.

I mean, countries like Canada, like Australia would also qualify, or even Norway that plays its role in, in peacemaking and conflict resolution of Finland.

Finland was involved in your country in the resolution of the Aceh province crisis.

So you have country, and I do think that they're going to be unbalanced, much more critical contributors to peace and conflict resolution in the world and would be able to play a role to reduce the influence of the triggers, particularly the two major triggers that we have now, the United States of America and China, where I think we may not be able to play the role that such countries have played on account of their incredible resources is that we have limited resources that is hardly enough for us, let alone for countries around us, no matter how much we want to try and help.

But collectively, when we work together.

And I think that's the key.

When such countries work together collectively as middle powers, they influence them to be more and certainly critical to the future of peace in the globe.