Korede Abdullah 
Akintunde Adeyemo
LAGOS, Nigeria – When reports emerged that Nigeria had committed about $9 million to lobbying firms in Washington, public reaction was swift. On social media, critics questioned the morality of the spending, arguing that the money would be better used to address insecurity, inflation, and public services at home.
But foreign policy experts say the outrage obscures how global diplomacy actually works. Lobbying, particularly in the United States, is not an underground activity. It is a legal, regulated instrument of influence used by governments, corporations, and advocacy groups to shape policy outcomes. In Washington, where decisions can affect global security, trade, and sanctions, access matters.
In an exclusive interview with Africa Health Report, (AHR), a US-based lawyer and international affairs analyst, Akintunde Adeyemo said Nigeria’s move fits squarely within international norms.
“Lobbying the US government has clear strategic value,” he says. “Strong presence and connections are essential to getting things done in Washington. Even American companies spend millions annually lobbying their own government. A sovereign country would be naïve not to do the same.”
What lobbying means in the US
In the US, lobbying is governed by strict disclosure laws. Registered lobbyists must publicly declare: Who they represent, what issues they are lobbying on, and how much they are paid.
These records are filed within legally mandated timelines and are accessible to the public.
Failure to comply can result in heavy fines or criminal prosecution.
“That is the difference between lawful lobbying and illegal influence-peddling,” Adeyemo explains. “Nothing is hidden. Anyone can verify who is lobbying whom and for what purpose.”
Is Nigeria’s spending unusual?
While $9 million sounds substantial, analysts note that it is modest compared with what many countries and multinational corporations spend annually in Washington.
European governments, Gulf states, and Asian economies routinely spend more to influence US positions on security cooperation, energy policy, and trade. Even countries that publicly criticise the US often maintain lobbyists behind the scenes.
“The key issue is not whether Nigeria is lobbying,” Adeyemo says. “It is whether the lobbying is strategic, coordinated, and aligned with clear national objectives.”
Addressing ethical concerns
Some critics have drawn parallels between Nigeria’s actions and cases where foreign governments were accused of corrupt practices in the US. Adeyemo dismisses the comparison.
He cites Egypt, where a US senator was jailed for accepting illegal payments linked to foreign interests.
“That was not lobbying; it was a crime,” he says. “Nigeria is operating within established legal frameworks. Conflating the two only confuses the public debate.”
Security, terrorism, and US engagement
Nigeria’s lobbying effort is closely tied to security cooperation, particularly in counterterrorism.
Nigeria has long sought stronger US support in intelligence sharing, military training, and equipment acquisition. But Adeyemo cautions against expecting dramatic or immediate military intervention.
“You cannot defeat terrorism from the sky alone,” he says. “Airstrikes without intelligence coordination and political engagement do not solve complex security problems.”
Instead, he argues for a comprehensive partnership combining military support, intelligence collaboration, targeted operations, and sustained diplomatic engagement.
Why public backlash persists
Much of the backlash, Adeyemo believes, reflects how complex foreign policy debates play out online.
“Social media rewards simplicity,” he says. “Nuance is lost. Emotion replaces analysis, and popularity replaces expertise.”
Foreign policy, he adds, is about trade-offs rather than moral absolutes.
Are there risks?
Sceptics warn that foreign assistance often comes with hidden costs. Adeyemo agrees the concern is valid. “In a transactional world, great powers pursue interests, not friendships,” he says. “Every form of external assistance must be carefully examined to avoid strategic vulnerability.”
But disengagement, he argues, is not a realistic option.
Why Nigeria still engages Washington
International relations are shaped by power asymmetries. Adeyemo invokes the ancient Melian Dialogue, which captures the enduring reality of global politics: the strong shape outcomes, while weaker states must navigate carefully.
“By lobbying policymakers in Washington, Nigeria is pursuing its interests through accepted channels,” he says. “That is not a betrayal of sovereignty. It is how modern statecraft works.”
The debate, then, is not whether Nigeria should lobby, but how transparently and effectively it does so—and how well citizens hold leaders accountable for the results.
About the Author
Mirian Gom 
Oluwafunbi Bello