The media is a critical institution in any modern democratic society. It sets agenda and mobilise and galvanise public interest and support for public policy and governance. In the instantiation of this discourse, the media and its mediatisation agency is central in giving vent to the foreign policy pursuits of the Nigeria. What has been the experience of Nigeria in this direction? The agendum of this paper is to answer this question with special reference to the demolition of a section of the Nigeria High Commission building in Accra, Ghana, on June 19, 2020. The print media is the focus of our analysis. We argue that the Nigerian media has profound interest and understanding of Nigeria’s foreign policy vision and viewed the demolition of a section of the embassy as a clear case of the violation of the 1963 Geneva Convention on the inviolability of diplomatic premises; in foreign policy terms specifically, they papers viewed the act as a symbolic wake up call for Nigeria to re-examine her Afrocentricism policy. The papers also lavishly and generously opened their pages for public commentaries on the issue; thereby deepening and entrenching their agenda setting role. Majority of commentators also condemned the architectural violence and called for the critical investigation of this unwholesome act in order to avoid its reoccurrence in the future. The Nigerian media has acquitted itself well in giving fillip to Nigeria’s foreign policy pursuits, nevertheless, much remains to be done especially in rousing the citizenry and popular interest in foreign policy making and implementation.
The Debacle: Demolition of Nigeria’s High Commission Building in Ghana
The premises of the Nigeria High Commission in Ghana is located at 19/21 Julius Nyerere Street, Ringway Estates, East Ridge, Accra, Ghana. On Friday, 19th June, 2020, at about 23:00hours bulldozers, acting on the instructions of the Ghana Urban Development Agency, entered into the premises of the High Commission of Nigeria and demolished a building belonging to the High Commission. This act is both criminal and complete violation of the 1963 Geneva Convention on the inviolability of a nation-state’s diplomatic premises. The sheer compunction and audacity of the act sent shock waves across the global diplomatic community. What could have thrown up this debacle on the canvas of Nigeria-Ghana relations?
To avert a likely diplomatic row between the two countries, Ghana swiftly swung into action. Firstly, the President of Ghana, Nana Akufo-Addo, called his Nigerian counterpart, President Muhammadu Buhari, and tendered his unreserved apologies to the unfortunate incident with a pledge to get to the root of the matter. Secondly and true to type to his promise, the Ghanaian authorities set up a committee made up of the its Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Regional Integration, the Land Commission, National Security Secretariat, and, Ghana Police Service with the charge to investigate the incident and make appropriate recommendations.
The committee found out that the bone of contention was over a 4-acre parcel of land in the Accra Osu Mantse Layout. The land in question is traditionally vested in the Osu Stool. In 2019, the Osu Stool had requested that the Land Commission to grant lease to a third party on the land. The Land Commission thereafter requested that the Nigeria High Commission a claimant of the land to avail it of the relevant documents of ownership; a request which the Nigeria High Commission was did not respond to. In the wake of the diplomatic imbroglio, the Nigeria embassy vide letter referenced SCR/LCS74/Vol.2/95 dated 7th August, 2000 presented receipts of payments in respect of the acquisition of the land made by Bankers Draft payable to the Executive Secretary of the Lands Commission. Although Nigeria had paid and fulfilled all obligations with respect to the acquisition of the land, the Land title had not been issued to Nigeria since 2000 when the deal was sealed. The Lands Commission attested to the genuineness of the documents presented by Nigeria. The committee in its submission noted that the Nigeria High Commission had no required documents on the piece of land; however, the Ghanaian government promised to engage all the claimants to the land with a view of timeous and amicable resolution; and as noted by Ghana’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Shirley Botchwey, ‘given the delicate nature of the matter and its potential ramifications on Nigeria-Ghana relations’ (Aleke, 2020b, p.5).
The Paramount Ruler of the Osu Traditional Area and the President of the Greater Accra Regional House of Chiefs, Nii Okwei Kinka Dowuona VI who is vested with the traditional and custodial jurisdiction over the land has a different point of view. To him it is a clear case of trespass. In a statement he issued titled; Trespassing on the Parcel of Land Belonging to the Osu Stool,’ the demolished building in question was owned by a Nigerian business man and the embassy was merely acting as a cover to the businessman-landgrabber. In his words, ‘Osu Stool was informed that the structure was being erected by a Nigerian business person with the aid of the Nigerian High Commission and was forcibly trying to take over the said parcel of land’ (Aleke, 2020a, p.35). Whatever may be the true story, the indelible fact is that the premises of the Nigeria High Commission in Ghana was flagrantly violated contrary to extant diplomatic laws especially as enshrined in the 1963 Geneva Convention on the inviolability of the diplomatic premises of a nation-state.
The Ghanaian government has since apologised to Nigeria and promised to rebuild the demolished building. The Nigerian government on its part has since accepted the apology and stated that it would not on account of the diplomatic hara-kiri ‘engage in a street fight with Ghana.’ According to the Nigeria’s presidential spokesperson, Garba Shehu, ’matters such as this when they arise, it is always better that they should be resolved diplomatically. No, there shouldn’t be a fight between Nigeria and Ghana, this will not happen’(Shehu, 2020, p.3).
The enduring question for this paper is to analyse how the Nigerian media captured this event and how it set the agenda for Nigeria’s foreign policy. It is apposite to state that the media plays a crucially fundamental role in every modern society and no less so in the foreign policy domain. It is for this reason that a one-time Secretary-General of the United Nations, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, posited that the ‘CNN is the sixteenth member of the Security Council’ (Minear, Scott, and Weiss 1996, p:4). Many theoretical epistemologies have been propounded by media scholars to interrogate the role of the media in society; the theoretical underpinnings of these epistemological frameworks have in equal measure been deployed to pigeon-hole the symbiotic intercourse between the media and foreign policy. These theoretical epistemologies amongst others are: agenda-setting (McCombs, Shaw, and Weaver 1997); agenda-building (McQuail, 2011); manufacturing consent (Chomsky and Herman, 2001); framing (Reese, Gandy, and Grant 2001); indexing hypothesis (Bennett, 1990); and positioning hypothesis (Shaw and Miller 2002); realist theory (Morgenthau, 1990); substitution theory (Regan,2000); telediplomacy (Ammon, 2001); and, mediapolitik (Edward, 2001).
The theoretical landscape of media and foreign policy is so conceptually pullulated that Eytan Gilboa (2005) had posed the question as to whether there is ‘The Search for a Communication Theory of International Relations.’ Gilboa (2005, p:330) contends that in looking at the media and policy making, two issues are of comparative cardinal importance: a.) the impact of the media on specific foreign policy decision in comparison to the relative impact of the other factors, and b.) the application of this procedure to several relevant case studies. Livingston (1997) in a similar comparative analysis of media and policymaking identify three key elements, a.) an accelerant to decision making, b.) an impediment to the achievement of desired policy goals; and, c.) a policy agenda-setting agent. Robinson (2000; 2002), aligning theory and practice, in the analysis of media and foreign policy contends that the media is most likely to meaningfully influence foreign policymaking in a situation of policy uncertainty and where media coverage of a foreign policy is critically framed and empathizes with the victims.
Whatever the variances in theoretical formulations, the one indisputable fact is that the media is indispensable in any modern society and sets and frames the discursive agenda of society. In simple terms, the media is an agenda-setting institution in modern society. It is on account of this reality that this paper is enamoured of the agenda setting theory. The theory posits that by the media providing the platform for public discourse, it influences both the trajectory of the production and consumption of public thought. However, the radical revolution in information and communication technology has brought in its wake plethora of media platforms that have unhorse the monopolization of this function by the traditional media. Given this scenario, the traditional media is in many instances surpassed by the new media in reportage especially in terms of instantaneity and simultaneity. This has opened up the argument for the triangulation of the agenda setting and agenda building theories in the analysis of contemporary media phenomenon.
The agenda setting function of the media is embedded in three fundamental layers: media agenda; public agenda, and policy agenda. Media agenda deals with what the media itself is interested in achieving by setting a given agenda; public agenda on the other hand deals with issues of public interest, the impact of such issues on the public and public responses to them; and policy agenda is concerned with how issues on the media agenda reflects in the imagination and responses of public policy makers. Framing theory deals with the mode, style, perspective and ideological framework of presenting a news item. It deals with the ideological intention of the news presenters and the goals they want to achieve. Oftenest, as is the case, the intent is to promote a discourse; to amplify the critical dimensions of a question; to enhance interpretations; make moral evaluations and recommendations (Gitlin, 1980; Tuchman 1978).
In the context of this discourse, our interest lies in examining how the media using its power of agenda-setting and agenda building framed the Nigeria-Ghana embassy building demolition debacle. The media covering of this event is critical to the public and foreign policy makers’ understanding of the issues involved; and frames influences the general public’s reaction. The foreign policy agenda of Nigeria as constitutionalised in Chapter 2 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which deals with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in Section 19 (a-e) to include: a.) promotion and protection of the national interests; b.) promotion of African integration and support for African unity; c.) promotion of international cooperation for the consolidation of the universal peace and mutual respect among all nations, and elimination of discrimination in all its manifestations; d.) respect for international law and treaty obligations as well as the seeking of settlement of international disputes by negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication, and e.) promotion of a just world.
The Media and Foreign Policy in Nigeria
There can be no little doubt that the media play important roles in the foreign policy system of the modern state. The difference that may likely separate the quality of intervention of the media across nation-states is a difference of degree not of kind. And the reasons could be borne out of a myriad of factors which are immediately outside the ken of this work. In the instant case of Nigeria, the media has proven to be a factor in the foreign policy making and implementation process (Akinyemi 1979; Fafowora,1990; Udeala 2016). The Nigerian media on account of professional, organizational and administrative factors have not played critical roles in Nigeria’s foreign policy architecture as would be expected of it (Alimi, 2005). In the face of these extenuating circumstances, nonetheless, the Nigerian media has played, and in the foreseeable future would continue to play important and critical roles in the honing and shaping of foreign policy.
In Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, the media has acquitted itself in the area of foreign policy with professional accomplishments. Three areas in this regard comes to mind. Firstly, the restoration of Nigeria’s poor international image. In our background analysis of the period preceding the advent of the Fourth Republic we alluded to how a combination of political and social factors sullied the image and reputation of Nigeria. The image crisis of Nigeria was worsened by the rising tide of petty crimes, scam letters, armed robbery, kidnapping and the Hobbesian-like state of insecurity that pervaded the country. Salamone (2014, p:75), an American anthropologist and specialist on Nigeria, in his comment on Nigeria’s image in America at the time states that:
The general view of Nigeria portrayed in the American media is that of a dangerous country, filled with internal sectarian interests. Christians are pitted against Muslims. Men are opposed to women. The Sharia law is seen as repressive and outmoded, a medieval device to keep women subjected to men. The men are oversexed and even brutish, having four wives to do their bidding. Men are seen to keep their wives at home, at least Muslims men. Moreover, the sharia allows men to stone their wives or daughters for disgracing the family. Even if raped, women can be stoned for disgracing their families. Indeed, Americans feel that with all their regional, religious, ethnic, and linguistic divisions, it is somewhat of a miracle that Nigeria remains a nation today.
The description couldn’t have been gorier. With poor international image and a pariah status to match, Nigeria was psychologically crestfallen and lacking in the requisite moral stamina and political energy to pursue her foreign policy objectives. The immediate foreign policy agenda of the government was the restoration of Nigeria’s battered image and the restitution of her political carriage, dignity, and respectability. Given the media’s professionalism, publicity and propaganda resources, the government mobilised the media both to facilitate in the execution of this onerous assignment. The federal government established sixty-seven digital television stations and thirty-two digital FM stations across the country in what the then minister of Information, Jerry Gana had termed ‘federal government effort in regarding information dissemination as an internal part of democracy in the country.’
The Nigerian media was not in doubt of the onerous task that lay ahead of it if it had to play any meaningful role in exorcising of the ghost that hovered on the firmament of Nigeria’s global image. The media deploying its agenda-setting and framing power embarked on massive editorializations, feature commentaries, columns, letter writings, public relations, publication of critical opinions on Nigeria’s international relations and the engagement in plethora of media diplomacy all aimed at remobilising the citizenry and galvanization of internal opinion to support Nigeria’s foreign policy drives especially as it related to her image re-engineering agenda. This strategy paid off.
No sooner than it had started, Nigeria’s traditional allies lent support to her and this translated into assisting Nigeria to track Abacha loot and return same to Nigeria; she began to be courted in international cycles and concomitantly her confidence level rose exponentially and consequently begun to exert influence on global issues. At the African level, she resumed her position of prominence in African affairs—bilaterally and multilaterally—and this is emblematised by the leading roles Nigeria played in the formation of the New Partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD) in 2001 and the transformation of the Organisation of African Union (OAU) into African Union (AU) in 2002. It is also worthy to note that at the time too, Nigerians began once more to be elected into major positions in international organisations such as the United Nations and African Union.
Secondly, the Nigerian media played a key role in setting and framing the debate on Nigeria-Cameroun conflict over the Bakassi peninsula. In an empirical study on the involvement of the media in the Bakassi conflict, Alemoh and Udoh (2015) demonstrated how the Nigerian media— particularly The Guardian, Punch, New Nigerian and Vanguard—were critically crucial in shaping the conflict. The findings of the study indicate that 62.5% of respondents agreed that the editorial boards of their newspapers were honestly convinced that press coverage could facilitate a non-violent resolution of the Bakassi peninsula conflict. In point of the media intervention and Nigeria’s foreign policy, the study underscored a convergence (Alemoh and Udoh 2015, p: 10):
… there seem to be a convergence in the newspaper coverage of the Bakassi Peninsula conflict and the principles outlined in the Nigeria foreign policy thrust. The main area of convergence is in keeping of peace in the African continent which is a paramount tenet of the policy thrust….enshrined in the policy thrust derived from the basic principles in the 1999 Constitution Section 19 (a)-(e) of the Federal Republic of Nigeria: promotion and protection of the national interests; b.) promotion of African integration and support for African unity; c.) promotion of international cooperation for the consolidation of the universal peace and mutual respect among all nations, and elimination of discrimination in all its manifestations; d.) respect for international law and treaty obligations as well as the seeking of settlement of international disputes by negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication, and e.) promotion of a just world.
Thirdly, the Nigerian media is critical in the mobilization of public opinion to support foreign policy pursuits. The importance of public opinion in foreign policy is crucially central (Rosenau, 1961). The Nigerian media is noted to have been a major factor in the galvanization of public opinion to support foreign policy issues. It is a measure of the effectiveness of the media in this regards that the Nigerian publics on many occasions have risen to engage on key foreign policy issues.
Generally speaking, the Nigerian media have acquitted itself well in the domain of Nigeria’s foreign policy. The latest foreign policy issue that has occupied its attention is the demolition of a building within the Nigeria High Commission premises in Ghana. The event and its reportage fall within the Fourth Republic; and here again, the Nigerian media has scored a major point in not only bringing the event to public knowledge but mobilising the citizenry to counteract and countermand the undiplomatic act, and also, urge the federal government to revisit her foreign policy philosophy.
Nigeria-Ghana Building Demolition Debacle: The Media Perspective
It is apposite to begin this analysis by entering some methodological clarifications. The choice of newspapers and commentaries that constitutes the wellspring of this analysis is not based on any scientific and methodological protocols of population precision, sample size, and distributional equity. In the Nigerian context, methodological matters in scientific research are oftenest forced into the procrustean bed of ethno-spatial variations and political dynamics of the country; such as choosing the choice of papers to be analysed, for instance, based on North-South dichotomy, Christian-Muslim dichotomy, and many other dichotomous variables. The methodological and analytical vision of this paper was not encumbered by these sorts of binaries.
The choice of newspapers was based on a close reading of the reportage of the event. Almost all the newspapers ran stories on the demolition saga; and therefore, a need arose to clearly set defined parameters of which papers to choose; these imperative forms the scientific ontology of this paper. Our parameters were basically three. One, the papers that reported the most on the crisis; two, wrote editorial on it; and three, carried the most critical commentaries. The papers that form this analysis, to wit: Daily Sun, Daily Trust, Leadership, Nigerian Pilot, Nigerian Tribune, Punch, The Guardian, The Nation, Thisday, Vanguard, stood out. It is also important to state that this paper is inductive and qualitative in analysis. It proceeds from observing the media scenario and its reportage of the event and weaving a qualitative analytical narrative.
All the Newspapers in their editorial opinions converged on five thematic points. One, philosophically speaking, the action of Ghana contradicts the pulsing essence of pan-Africanism. The action sacrifices the shared bonds of racial solidarity, colonial experiences and struggles, and the common aspiration of forging continental solidarity and unity emblematised in the New Partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD), Africa Development Bank (AfDB), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and the recently inaugurated Africa Continental Free Trade Area (AfCTA). They argue that a love-hate relation could hardly be the path of African development; to the contrary, it portends collective misery and underdevelopment. Therefore, African countries must jettison acts that throw spanners in their wheel of progress.
Two, all the papers were unanimous in their condemnation of the demolition as a heinous diplomatic crime. The crime is made the more condemnatory and suspicious because the Ghanaian Police Authority supervised the architectural violence. Writing on the complicity of the Ghana Police in the crisis, the Punch, noted that, ‘…the Nigeria High Commission in Accra, Ghana, was recently invaded by some non-state actors who destroyed a set of buildings under construction. Intriguingly, more than a dozen police personnel supervised this act of aggression.’ This put paid to the contention in certain quarters that the demolition exercise was a non-state action and on account of this should have raised tempers verging on a diplomatic row between the two countries (Fawole, 2020).
Nothing lends credence and emblematises the complicity of the Ghanaian police authorities in the demolition exercise more than the fact that, besides the supervision of the demolition by some elements of the Ghanaian Police authority, when the Nigeria embassy diplomatic officials made frantic calls and efforts to get the Ghanaian Police high command wade into the issue and salvage the situation such calls yielded no tangible fruits. Given this scenario, the papers unanimously called for a thorough investigation of the incident with a view of finding out the immediate and remote causes of the crisis and identifying the culprits with the view of bringing them to justice in order to serve as a deterrence to others and avoid a repeat occurrence of such ugly events in the future. And more fundamentally, they deplored the porous security situation around the embassy premises and other Nigerian diplomatic missions across the globe that have been serially violated. Bottom-line, the host countries and Nigerian diplomatic officials must take more than a passing and lackadaisical interest in embassy and diplomatic security matters.
Three, the demolition saga contravene is in clear violation of the Geneva Convention on diplomatic relations which holds that the diplomatic precincts of nation-states inviolable and equateable to the territorial and sovereign integrity of the sending state. Quoting the relevant section of the treaty, the Leadership states that,
‘The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolable and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats.’ When the Nigeria High Commission building was demolished, this law was breached by the Ghanaian government.
Four, all the papers were in agreement that the Africa as the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy should be reviewed. Vanguard did not carry out specifically editorialised on the demolition issue. However, in a two-part editorial commentary, specifically called for the complete review of the doctrine of Afrocentricism as Nigeria’s foreign policy thrust. In their view, Afrocentricism is a failure. Daily Trust, whose words graphically captured this feeling, noted that, ‘the big brother or Africa as the centrepiece of our foreign policy should stop. Nigeria should now look out for her interests.’ The Leadership newspaper, in a more dramatic imagery posits that, given the failure of Africa as the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy, ‘…it is about time the Salvation Army marched homeward.’
These commentaries mirror the foreboding feverishness, the existential embarrassments and ennui, the anguishing antsy and angst that Nigerians, her friends and admirers have had to experience in the face of flailing by her benefactors. By clanging cymbals of the call for the the review of the policy of Afrocentricism by these newspapers echoes the national sentiments and draws attention to the contemporary urgency of pulling down the ugly spectre that is haunting and hounding Nigeria in the international arena. A media analyst on Nigeria’s diplomatic affairs, Linus Aleke, apparently irked by the contemptuous and condescending attacks on Nigeria and Nigerians in the international arena has itemised and critically dissected this ailment (Aleke 2020c). And the attacks, within a short space of time and is quite much, and as such desiring of immediate and prompt action (Aleke, 2020c; Ojo, 2020).
Five and finally, but by no means the least, all the papers had a convergence on the point that one of the major causes of rifted relations between Nigeria and Ghana is Ghanaian domestic policy that tend to be tailor-made to assail the interests of Nigerian business operating in Ghana. Besides, trade Nigeria and Ghana have been historical rivalries that cut across political, economic, cultural, and sports spectrums (Mailafia 2020). This rivalry and no-love lost relationship is emblazoned by the series of expulsion of citizens of both countries across times. This thought is captured by the Leadership newspapers thusly, ‘for decades Ghana has become comfortable with the obnoxious tendency of poking its fingers into the eyes of Nigerians. We recall the expulsion of Nigerians from that country in the 1960s just because they are Nigerians. Ft Lt Jerry Rawlings, as Head of State of that country, once described Nigeria as a big for nothing country. He apologised and we, the ever tolerant and forgiving big brother, accepted.’ Good enough, both countries have recognised the nonsensicality of the rivalry and have set in motion machinery to address the lingering issues (Vanguard, 2020b, p.18).
In summary, all the papers that commented on the demolition of the building in the Nigerian embassy in Ghana condemned the act unequivocally. But more fundamentally, in foreign policy terms, their reportage set the agenda of the need to review Nigeria’s Afrocentric foreign policy thrust. This agenda has erected a knoll on which the foreign policy establishment, scholars and intellectuals would stand to analyse Nigeria’s foreign policy now and in the future. This imperative of review it appears has come earlier than had been expected. In the heat of the Nigeria-Ghana embassy demolition crisis, the spokesperson for Nigeria’s federal government, Garba Shehu, had quipped that Nigeria would not go into a street fight with Ghana (Shehu, 2020, p.3). As if a retort, Nigeria’s foreign affairs minister, Geoffrey Onyema, stated that Nigeria would review her foreign policy architecture. As he puts it (Onyema, 2020, VON), ‘…with regards to changing the foreign policy direction of the country, we need to have an all Nigerian meeting of stakeholders to look at our foreign policy review it, and to see in which direction it should be going.’
The Nigerian media has acquitted itself professionally in the reportage of foreign policy issues in the Fourth Republic especially in the case of the Nigeria-Ghana demolition debacle. One major achievement that the reportage has brought in its wake is the imperative to review the foreign policy architecture of Nigeria. This is a call for further reportage and analytical diagnosis of issues bordering on Nigeria’s foreign policy; it is not yet Uhuru. Consequently, we call for a more harmonious relationship between the Nigeria foreign policy establishment and the media, it is only by so doing that Nigeria can accomplish the objectives of her foreign policy as enunciated in Section 19 (a)-(e) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, thusly: promotion and protection of the national interests; b.) promotion of African integration and support for African unity; c.) promotion of international cooperation for the consolidation of the universal peace and mutual respect among all nations, and elimination of discrimination in all its manifestations; d.) respect for international law and treaty obligations as well as the seeking of settlement of international disputes by negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication, and e.) promotion of a just world.
This paper examined the nature of the Nigeria-Ghana embassy demolition debacle and its reportage by the Nigerian media. The major aim of the study was to find out how the crisis was reported and framed and its impact on Nigeria’s foreign policy. The need to x-ray the impact was informed by the fact the media as a fourth estate of the realm, one of its fundamental functions is agenda-setting. All the papers analysed unanimously condemned the demolition exercise as a flagrant disregard for the extant diplomatic laws and treaty guiding interstate relations. Other points that their opinions converged were that Nigeria’s Afrocentricism policy needs o be reviewed; the demolition portends ominous signals for intra-African relations especially the upholding of pan-Africanism ideals and regional and continental integration.
The angst generated by the demolition and the framing and agenda-setting of the media on the need to review Nigeria’s foreign policy is yielding positive result. Nigeria’s minister for foreign affairs, Geoffery Onyema, has already hinted that a grand conference of foreign policy experts would sooner than later by convocated to review Nigeria’s foreign policy. This is a positive development. As much as the Nigerian media has been demonstrated efficiency in honing and shaping the trajectory of Nigeria’s foreign policy, it shouldn’t rest on its oars, for as the goes, for whom much is given much is expected. It is only by so doing that Nigeria’s foreign policy objectives as enshrined in Chapter 2, Section 19 (a-e) dealing with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy would be achieved.
Akinyemi, B. (1979) The British Press and the Nigerian Civil War: The Godfather Complex Lagos: Nigerian Institute for International Affairs
Aleke, L. (2020a) The Untold Story of Nigeria/Ghana Diplomatic Impasse, Nigerian Pilot Newspapers Wednesday, June, 24, Vol.10, No148, p.35
Aleke, L. (2020b) Nigeria High Commission didn’t have required land document, says Ghana. Nigerian Pilot Newspapers Friday, June, 26, Vol.10, No150, p. 5
Aleke, L. (2020c) Interrogating Constant Diplomatic Affront on Nigeria. Nigerian Pilot Newspapers Wednesday, July 15, Vol. 10, No.166
Alemoh, T. A. and Udoh, A. P. (2015) Media and Foreign Policy: The Case of Nigerian Press Coverage of the Bakassi Peninsula Conflict. Journal of Contemporary Communication Vol.1, No. 4
Alimi, T. (2005) The Role of the Media in Nigeria’s External Relations. Joy, U.G. ed. New Horizons for Nigeria in World Affairs Lagos: Nigerian Institute for International Affairs
Ammon, R. (2001) Global Television and The Shaping of World Politics: CNN, Telediplomacy, and Foreign Policy, Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Bennett, W. L. (1990) Toward A Theory of Press-State Relations in The United States. Journal of Communication, 40: 103–125
Chomsky, N. and Herman, E. (1994) Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of The Mass Media New York: Pantheon
Daily Trust Newspapers Editorial (2020) Ghana’s Undiplomatic Mess. Vol. 50, N0.74, Thursday, July 2, p.14
Daily Sun Newspapers Editorial (2020) Demolition of Nigeria’s Embassy Building in Ghana. Vol.17, No.4483, p.11
Edwards, L. (2001) Mediapolitik: How the Mass Media Have Transformed World Politics, Washington, D.: Catholic University of America Press.
Fafowora, O. (1990) Pressure Groups and Foreign Policy Lagos: Heinemann Educational Books
Fawole, A. (2020) On the Nigeria-Ghana Diplomatic Row. The Nation Newspapers, Tuesday, July 7, Vo.13, No.5089, p.13
Gilboa, E. (2005) The CNN Effect: The Search for a Communication Theory of International relations. Political Communication
Gitlin, T. (1980) The World is Watching: Mass Media in Making and Unmaking of the New Left Berkeley: University of California Press
Gulloma, A. M. (2020) Nigeria to Review Foreign Policy Direction-FG. Blueprint Newspapers, Thursday, July 9, No. 2, 314, p.13
Leadership Newspapers Editorial (2020) Nigeria’s Foreign Policy and Ghana’s Impudence. No.3,509, June 30, p.3
Livingston, S. (1997) Beyond The "CNN Effect": The Media-Foreign Policy Dynamic. Norris, P. ed. Politics and The Press: The News Media and Their Influences. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Mailafia, O. (2020) How Ghana Bulldozes Nigeria. The Punch Newspapers, Monday, July 6, 2020, Vol. 44, No.22, 235, p.48
McCombs, M., Shaw, D. and Weaver, D. (1997) Communication and Democracy: Exploring the Intellectual Frontiers in Agenda-Setting, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Minear, L., Scott, C. and Weiss, T. (1996) The News Media, Civil War, and Humanitarian Action, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Morgenthau, H.J. (2012) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace New Delhi: Kalyani Publishers
Nigerian Tribune Newspapers Editorial (2020) The Demolition of Nigeria’s High Commission in Ghana. No.17, 575, Tuesday, June 30, p.9
Ojo, O. (2020) Nigeria Must be Pro-active in Dealing with Other Countries. Daily Sun Newspapers, Monday July 6, Vo.17, No.4486, p.17
Onyema, G. (2020) Nigeria to Review her Foreign Policy. Voice of Nigeria, Timothy Choji, Wednesday, July 8
Punch Newspapers Editorial (2020) Ghana’s Demolition of Nigeria High Commission Building. Vol. 44, No.22,231, Tuesday, June 30, p.14
Reese, S., Gandy, O. and Grant, A., eds. (2001) Framing Public Life, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Regan, P. (2000) Substituting Policies During U.S. Interventions in Internal Conflicts, a Little of this, a Little of that. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 44: 90–106.
Robinson, P. (2000) World politics and Media Power: Problems of Research Design. Media, Culture and Society, 22: 227–232.
Rosenau, J.N. (1961) Public Opinion and Foreign Policy New York: Random House
Salamone, F. A. (2014) A Personal Reflection on the Portrayal of Nigeria in the American Media. Journal of Contemporary Communication Vol.1, No.3
Shehu, G. (2020) Demolition: Nigeria won’t engage in street fight with Ghana-Presidency. Daily Trust, Wednesday, June 24, Vol.50, N0.68, p.3.
Udeala, S.O. (2016) The Role of the Media in Promoting Foreign Policy in Nigeria,1999-2015 South East Journal of Political Science Vol.2, No.2
The Nation Newspaper Editorial (2020) Ghana’s Faux pas.Vol.13, No.5085, July 3, p.11
The Guardian Editorial (2020) Revisiting Nigeria’s Diplomatic Row with Ghana, Vol.37, No.15,182, Wednesday, July 22, p.16
Thisday Editorial (2020) Between Nigeria and Ghana. Vol.25, No.9235, Wednesday, July 22, p.15
Vanguard Newspapers Editorial (2020) Time to Change Our Foreign Policy Thrust (1). Vol.27, No. 64101, Monday, June 29, p. 18
Vanguard Newspapers Editorial (2020a) Our Foreign Policy Thrust Must Change (2). Vol. 27, No. 64103, June 30, p.18
Vanguard Newspapers (2020b) Resolving Nigeria-Ghana Trade Relations. Monday, July 20, Vol.27, No.64117