It is evident today that Nigerian economy is characterized by a number of challenges. From the inception of military regime, the economy was burdened by mismanagement which brought in additional problem such as high fiscal deficits which, threw macroeconomic services into despair, epileptic power supply which rendered growth activities in the country handicapped, there was low output in production, high unemployment, and a crushing external debt overhang prevailed, all this existed prior to the inception of a civilian democratic leadership of president Olusegun Obasanjo. There has been tremendous changes and growth in the economy and national development of Nigeria from 1999 upwards.

This study employ the secondary data, such as books encyclopedia, journals, internet materials and government publications, in gathering the information that enabled better understanding of the subject matter.

In these findings, the study identifies the historical background of Economic Diplomacy of the past regime and there policy and as a result of the epileptic and mismanagement of political as well as economical activities, these made the new civilian administration of president Obasanjo employ his `idiosyncrasies' cum methods. And the extent to which he has been able to exert influence on foreign policy matters through the general reforms from 1999 to 2007.

The study recommends that for the identified strategies to be fully impactful for economic growth of the country as well as the national development there must be transparency of government and earring officials must be persecuted.














Background to the Study                                                                              1

Statement of Problem                                                                                    7

Objectives of the Study                                                                                   7

Research Questions                                                                                         7

Rationale of the Study                                                                                      8

Scope and Limitation of Study                                                                      8

Research Methodology                                                                                 8

Literature Review                                                                                             9

Notes and References                                                                                 14



The Subject Matter of Economic Diplomacy in Nigeria                                  15

Meaning and Use of Diplomacy                                                                        17

Economic Diplomacy from the Ancient to the Modern Time                       17

Main Tenets of Nigeria's Economic Diplomacy                                                21

Notes and References                                                                                        28



Foreign Policy as A Tool for Nigerian Economic Diplomacy                           29

A History of Nigeria's Foreign Policy                                                                32

Significance of Foreign Policy in Nigeria                                                          34



The Impact of Economic Diplomacy on Nigeria's Foreign Policy:              38

National Development Strategies through Economic Reforms                  43

Anti-Corruption Crusade                                                                                 48

Debt Cancellation                                                                                             49

Notes and References                                                                                      54


Summary                                                                                                            55

Recommendation                                                                                              57

Conclusions                                                                                                        57

Bibliography                                                                                                       58




















1.1              BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

The term ‘diplomacy’ is as old as human history and since its universal usage had come to mean a lot to many people, especially in carrying out the  exchange of state relations with cordiality and mutual acceptance. According to Stinnett (2005) diplomacy is the practice of verbal discussion with the intent to influence, transmit a position or negotiate on a given issue or situation for a mutually acceptable outcome.

Hamitton (1996) defined diplomacy as a peaceful conduct relations amongst political entities, their principals and or accredited agents.

Globalisation has augmented the importance of economic inter-dependence among countries. The emergence of an expanding rules-based global trading system under the World Trade Organisation and bilateral/regional trade agreements has opened the door for new opportunities in the sphere of world trade. This has spurred countries into engaging in negotiating a large number of international agreements through bilateral, regional and multilateral fora. These negotiations have generated the need for better understanding of the science and skills of economic diplomacy.

Economic diplomacy has evolved from trade diplomacy (Madan Kumar Dahal). Traditional trade diplomacy was the domain of government officials/diplomats and there was not much involvement of the private sector and the civil society except in some developed countries. With ever expanding economic globalisation and associated complexities, economic diplomacy has become an intrinsic part and determinant of the process of formulating and implementing a country's foreign policy.

A significant result of the evolution of traditional trade diplomacy into economic diplomacy is that the private sector and the civil society are now even more involved in decision making that influences the negotiating position of a country. While private sector involvement stems from the need to remain competitive in relevant markets, the involvement of the civil society results from the imperative to get views of common stakeholders factored into negotiating positions to imbue the position with their concerns, and thus both engagements result in wider national ownership.

Economic diplomacy is concerned with anticipating and influencing the outcomes of future economic policy regimes of other countries. This requires a need for better understanding of the working of market forces in different countries in the given dynamic global economic environment. The process of continuous engagement through economic diplomacy helps a country in advancing its economic interests and, equally importantly, those of its partners.

A crucial pre-condition for the successful conduct of economic diplomacy is the existence of a critical pool of skilled personnel in the government, private sector and civil society to understand and negotiate trade, investment and other economic issues from the national development perspective after taking into account a country's strengths, limitations, opportunities and threats.

The narrow perspective of economic diplomacy defines it as the conduct by government officials/diplomats in the context of negotiations and- other relations between nations - the art and science of conducting such relations, skills in managing negotiations, public relations, etc so that there is little or no ill-will. In other words, negotiations must end as a positive sum game. The broader perspective of economic diplomacy rests on the management of international relations through negotiations by government officials/diplomats; the skills required for such management; adroitness in personal relations; tact and engagement with private sector and civil society, etc.

In other words, economic diplomacy deals with articulation of foreign policy in the real world of economic relations between nations to flesh out and implement the principles and objectives set out in the policy. It involves the application of skills and tact in the conduct of official relations, particularly trade and investment, and in engaging the private sector and civil society constructively by governments of sovereign states. National economic success in today's world depends crucially on the skill of negotiators in forging effective and beneficial economic relationships/partnerships. Learning new skills and acquiring new knowledge is no longer just desirable; it has become an imperative. Over the years, Indian negotiators have acquired new skills and knowledge on economic diplomacy and the country is now in a position to cross-fertilise such experiences with those from other countries.

Economic diplomacy is a form of diplomacy. Economic diplomacy is the use of the full spectrum economic tools of the state to achieve its national interest. Economic diplomacy includes all the economic activities, including but not limited to export, import, investment, lending, aid, free trade agreements etc.

It is concerned with economic policy issues, e.g. work of delegations at standard setting organizations such as World Trade Organization (WTO). Economic diplomats also monitor and report on economic policies in foreign countries and give the home government advice on how to best influence them. Economic diplomacy employs economic resources, either as rewards or sanctions, in pursuit of a particular foreign policy objective. This is sometimes called "Economic Statecraft”.

The concept of economic diplomacy is of recent origin. There is no exact definition of economic diplomacy, but it can be described as formation and advanced policies relating to production, movement or exchange of goods, services, labour and investment in other countries.

It is traditionally defined as the decision-making, policy-making and advocating of the sending state-business interests. Economic Diplomacy requires application of technical expertise that analyze the effects of a country's (Receiving State) economic situation on its political climate and on the sending State's economic interests. The Sending State and Receiving State, foreign business leaders as well as government decision-makers work together on some of the most cutting-edge issues in foreign policy, such as technology, the environment, and HIV/AIDS, as well as in the more traditional areas of trade and finance. Versatility, flexibility, sound judgment and strong business skills are all needed in the execution of Economic Diplomacy.

According to Madan Kumar Dahal et al (2008), it is concerned with economic policy issues. Berridge and James (2003) state that "economic diplomacy is concerned with economic policy questions, including the work of delegations to conferences sponsored by bodies such as the WTO" and include "diplomacy which employs economic resources, either as rewards or sanctions, in pursuit of a particular foreign policy objective" also as a part of the definition.

Rana (2007) defines economic diplomacy as "the process through which countries tackle the outside world, to maximize their national gain in all the fields of activity including trade, investment and other forms of economically beneficial exchanges, where they enjoy comparative advantage.; it has bilateral, regional and multilateral dimensions, each of which is important".

A distinctive feature of economic diplomacy is that private sectors are involved in the decision-making process to influence negotiating position to remain in the global or regional competitive market. Harun Ur Rashid (Ibid 2005:1-2). Some consider economic diplomacy to be a fairly recent addition to the work of professional diplomats, who previously tended to concentrate almost exclusively on political tasks. Commercial work, like other functional sectors, consular or cultural, was traditionally viewed with disdain, and represented a secondary career track for high-flying diplomats.

However, in a globalised and interconnected world, economics is more important than ever as a determining element in international affairs. It is also a sizable component of relations between states. Thus, economics has moved to center ­stage in diplomacy and now extends beyond `commercial diplomacy'. Aside from foreign trade, it includes external investments, financial flows, aid, bilateral and multilateral economic negotiations and technology exchanges, which all `brand' countries and contribute to nation-building.

Economic diplomacy is an active and interconnected factor in integrated diplomacy, where the lines of division between functional areas are blurred, and each sector influences the other. In some ways, we have evolved back to the earliest recorded days of relations between kingdoms and principalities, when commerce was an important motivation for reaching out to other foreign entities. It led ancient civilizations to exchange spices, silks and other precious commodities with distant lands, thereby creating the norms and procedures within which the exchanges could be carried' out. These were the first. `international' accords and treaties that were not only concerned with conquest and territory, but with mutually beneficial commercial dealings within a legal framework. This portal explores the multiple dimensions of modern economic diplomacy as a component of international relations as analyzed by Ambassador Kishan Rana, (2002.)

The emergence of a democratic Nigeria in May 1999 ended 16 years of consecutive military rule (Bureau of African Affairs June 2007).

Military rule in Nigeria had a devastating effect on the country economy, Economic diplomacy and national development as haphazard policies were distorted, and implementation processes undermined. In addition, corruption, fraud, general mismanagement and lack of respect for human right became the order of the day. As such, the Nigerian economy as well as the nation's development was in a serious comatose when the civilian regime of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo assumed office in May 1999. However, hopes and expectations were high, and the Nigerian people were yearning for the dividends of democracy in socio-economic aspects. But how did the new civilian administration fare in its management of the national development with the use of economic diplomacy and what are the results? These are the issues to be addressed by this study. Going backwards a little the late General Sani Abacha regime, came to power in November 1993 under the pretence of resolving the political logjam, occasioned by the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential elections, but instead sought to perpetuate himself in power.

In the process, institutions were subverted, polity undermined and political crisis intensified. The economy was the worse for it. The junta "through; its repressive and dastardly acts undermined the economy as well as the national development" (Adebonyon and Mudasiru 2001). At the time that President Obasanjo came into office in 1999, the economy was stagnating and was characterized by poor management of public expenditure, low investor confidence, widespread corruption, infrastructural decay, a high debt burden severely eroded social capital and high incidence of poverty, with 70% of the population in 1996 living in absolute poverty. Inflation was at its peak and double standard became the rule of operation, the economy, after about four decades of political independence and economic management, suffered from fundamental structural defects, and remained in a persistent state of disequilibrium (federal republic of Nigeria April 2000). Its relationship with the outside world was poor and production as well as technological base was weak, outdated, narrow, inflexible and externally dependent. (April 2000).Also, infrastructure was poor, inadequate, lacked maintenance and economic incentives were generally low, giving rise to inadequate utilization of the factors of production. This mirrored the Nigerian economic, national development and the entire situation of the country until June 8,1998 when the head of the military junta, General Sani Abacha died. Immediately after The Provisional "Ruling Council met and decided that General Abdul Salam Abubakar, should fill the vacuum.

It is important to stress here that the morning of May 1999 witnessed a turning point in the political history of Nigeria as civilian political leaders were sworn in and the birth of the Fourth Republic became a reality after a prolonged military rule. The newly born fourth republic became highly instructive considering the scope and array of economic and political problems bequeathed to the country by the prolonged years of military rule and which the newly elected civilians have to cope with. Thus it is interesting to note that the performance of the Nigerian economy as regard its foreign policy in 1999 was mixed. Inflationary pressures eased especially during the second half of the year. At this period, inflationary pressures had decreased to 6.1 per cent. This was a great decrease as it had risen up to 70 percent in 1995 and 1996 (Masha, 2000: 36). This coincided with a period of expansionary fiscal deficit and money supply growth.

Also, the Naira exchange rate was stable as the dollar exchanged for N92.00 to a dollar as at the last quarter of 1999. However, the later part of year 2000 witnessed a drastic increase in the exchange rate. At this period up to the second half of year 2000, a dollar was exchanged for N135.00. this shows a decrease of about 50 percent in the value of the Naira. (CBN 1990) Although, on assumption of office in May, 1999, the Obasanjo administration immediately took decisive diplomatic steps to put in place an enabling environment for the thriving of democracy, regaining international respectability, and credibility and putting the economy on the path to sustainable growth and development. (Mudasiru and Adebonyon, 2001).

As at 1996, Nigeria's external debt stood at US$31 ,407,000.00 which presented Nigeria as the highest indebted country in Africa followed by Cote d7voire which has US$19,713,000.00 (cited in Southern, 2000). However, las at the end of December 1998, Nigeria's debt service obligation amounted to some 36 per cent of the National budget which translated into a payment of some $1.68 million out of the $3.61 billion that was actually due for 1998 (The Guardian 13, September, 1999).

However, it is important to stress that Nigeria borrowed some $28.025 billion over the Period 1979 to 1995 and paid back $35.845 billion in principal and interest, yet the outstanding debt as at the end of 199'7 still stood at a staggering $27.008 billion (The News, 1999). A total of US$, 724.9 million was used to service the country's debt in 1999 representing an increase of US$ 452.4 million over that of 1998 (CBN 1999). Also, there was a decline in the debt conversion scheme in 1999 as application for the program dropped from 29 in 1998 to 20 in 1999. The value of the applications also dropped to US$ 276.5 million from US$ 20,060:8 million. Consequently, the total debts redeemed declined from US$ 88.4 million in 1998 to US$. 59.7 million in 1999 (Ibid 1999.). Therefore, the cumulative value of debt redeemed between 1995 and 1999 amounted to $524.32 million. Therefore, on assuming office as earlier pointed out, the Obasanjo's administration took certain decisive steps to put in place an enabling environment for the thriving of democracy which in turn leads to national development, regaining international respectability and credibility and putting the economy on the path of sustainable growth and development (Mudasiru and Adabonyon 2001).


Economic diplomacy connotes an -instrument for the purpose of achieving a desired end; much of its focus is on how state and political elite employ its instrument of economy in advancing national development. With the inception of the regime of Ibrahim Babangida in August 1995, the conduct of Nigerian foreign policy was said to have been bastardized. The need for Obasanjos economic diplomacy from 1999-2007, as a result of the economic relations that existed between Nigeria and the outside world, in which Nigeria was regarded as one of the "risky" countries to enter into business with and was also listed among other countries with a threatened economy (Guardian 2006) Talking about the intricacies of economic diplomacy which needs to be understood, it is imperative to note that Obansanjo led a crusade of anti-corruption, even when Nigeria was rated as one of the most corrupt nations in the world, with its position rising between 4th and 6th in the last six years (Ibid).

Also, to find out if foreign policy through economic diplomacy may lead to national development.



The objectives of this study are to examine Economic Diplomacy and National Development and its impact on Nigeria 1999 – 2007.

The study will also discuss the policies and the strategies adopted in achieving them as well as examine the relationship between economic diplomacy and national development etc.



The following research questions will guide the study:

        i.            What were the objectives of the impacts of economic diplomacy and national development on Nigerian economy?

      ii.            Did Nigerian government engage in economic diplomacy?

    iii.            What method of economic diplomacy did Obasanjo’s administration adopt?

     iv.            Was economic diplomacy actually a contributory factor to national development 





The rationale for the study varies in the sense that firstly this work attempts to examine the origin of diplomacy cum economic diplomacy, secondly this work attempts to examine the impact of economic diplomacy on national development, the work also provides knowledge on how government and political elite should better employ foreign policy for the betterment of the nation at large as the return of democracy to Nigeria in 1999 improved the countries image all over the world, this will allowed the country to be more active in the international arena.

Obasanjo has been to several part of the globe in a bid to restore foreign investment flow back to the country, after the break down of relation with the wider world. This study also attempts a contribution to the literature of Nigeria's economic diplomacy in the world. It is particularly important because it examines how Obasanjo has made Nigeria a country to be recon with in the international scene after a long while.

 And to also ascertain if foreign policy through economic diplomacy really leads to national development, to also see what extent has foreign policy with the instrument of economic diplomacy aid the countries national development.



The scope and limitation of this study shall comprise the civilian administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo whose tenure started on May 27th 1999-2007, the scope shall also be within the frame work of his economic policies, within the country and the international community, the researcher is therefore limited to the case, study and by virtue of the volume of literature which the researcher is expected to explore, the researcher is also faced with limitations in terms of time constrain and distance with which to acquire these materials



By virtue of the vastness of the details that the researcher requires in this work the methodology of drawing of a sample frame may be difficult; the researcher thereby seeks to structure the work in that, studying the past to understand the present which will involve the reference to historical antecedents to explain the present day manifestations.

To this effect, secondary data collection techniques, which involves sourcing for information and available data analysis from libraries, internet, newspaper and journals as well as articles.



On this interesting subject of economic diplomacy and national development, there are various issues that will surface, such as the state of Nigeria before the Obasanjos administration in (1999) as well as during his time in office, as a result of the need to resolve these issues it is pertinent to note that there are numerous and vast volumes of publication and journals to the credit of notable scholars, their immense contributions provide us with secondary data thereby providing necessary fact but not all.

The encyclopedia Britannia, 331.) Defines diplomacy as the establish method of international discourse or the art of managing international relations chiefly by negotiation. Historically diplomacy means the conduct of official relations between sovereign states, usually bilaterally.

In the 20th century, diplomacy expanded to cover summit meeting and other international conferences, public and parliamentary diplomacy, the international activities of supranational and sub national entities, unofficial diplomacy by non governmental elements, and the work of international civil servant.

The first contact between individual tribes as they started communicating with each other for various reasons can historically speaking is considered as the origin of diplomatic practice. The appearance of tribal societies, together with their co-existence and mutual competitiveness brought about the need for at least occasional mutual dialogue. Diplomatic activities thus appeared in a rudimentary form quite early on in human history, and the time of its origin is definitely tied to the reasons and the form of its manifestation (Nicolson, 1988:5) thus here we can establish that the institution of diplomacy is as old as human history (Benco,1997a:257), but if we accept this thesis that "the state has to be considered as the key factor in diplomacy ", then it is necessary to conclude that, although we observe the origin of diplomacy in the ceremonial and symbolic elements of communication between individual tribes, "Diplomacy proper only appears with territorial social groups and the state as their essential forms of organizations". (Ibid 1997) in this context according to Milan Jazbec we can identify the era of the Greek city state as the most important one in the development of diplomacy.

A very important mile stone in the development of diplomacy appears with the emergency and rise of Italian city states, which in the 14th and especially the 15th century contributed with their varied activities to the establishment of diplomacy and all these elements of it that still determines its basic nature. Intensive political and economic mutual contacts as well as contact with other states, gave rise to a need for permanent emissaries from these states in those with which they co­operated most intensely (Banco 1998:49) Permanent diplomacy representations the basis of which were established in this period, is one of the two foundations of diplomacy. The other, the mutual communication between the state sending the representative and its mission in the receiving state appear, parallel with the introduction of permanent representatives and bodies of representatives.

Thus, we can conclude that in the middle ages especially in the 15th century, the basic elements of diplomatic practice were formed. The institution of permanent diplomatic representative was widely established and accepted as was mutual communication (albeit at a low technical level) between the state sending the representative and the representative himself. This communication is built mainly upon the instruction to the diplomatic representative and upon his report on the condition of the state receiving him. Even at this point, communication was mainly taking place between rulers rather than state this was the time when according to (Nicolson, 1988:10) "diplomacy as a profession can be said to have been generally recognized". This phase of the formation of clear outline in diplomatic practice ended with the peace of Westphalia in 1648 which among other things facilitated the start of the classical era of European diplomacy (Satow 1994:5).

The most important period in the formation of what we know as classical diplomacy is during the 18th and 19th centuries when Western Europe began and developed its overseas economic expansion, with alternating combinations of balance of power and constantly rearranging political relations within the leading group of European states. This facilitated the further development and formulation of diplomatic practice and encouraged the development of international law and its codification. The development of classical diplomacy reached its apogee at the congress of Vienna in 1815, when diplomacy was first recognized as a profession or an activity with its own internationally recognized rules of behaviour (Sen , Nicolson) According to Barston (2006:1) diplomacy is concerned with advising, shaping and implementing foreign policy. Diplomacy has been said to be concerned with the management of relations between state and other actors. As such he states that it is the means by which states through their formal and other representatives, as well as other actors, articulate, co­ordinates and secure exchanges of views, lobbying, visits, threats and other related activities.

Narrowly conceived in the manner defined above, diplomacy is different from foreign policy. While foreign policy is the substantive aspect of external relation, diplomacy is the procedural aspect. In this restricted sense, diplomacy is the process of putting into effect the foreign policies of nation-states. (Op cit, 1959) For Nicolson it consists of strategies and tactics for implementing foreign policy.

It is therefore, distinct from the substantive formulation of a nation's goals and objectives in its relation with other actors in the international system. Flowing from the above diplomats carries out policies using whatever tactics seem appropriate within the prescribed guidelines. Its primary tool is negotiation, mainly by accredited envoy, though political leaders also negotiate. Foreign policy is generally publicly enunciated; but most diplomacy is secret though its result is usually made public. The goal of diplomacy is to further the states interest which are dictated by geography, history, and economic. Safeguarding its independence, security and integrity-territorial, political and economic comes first. Diplomacy seeks, to strengthen the state, gaining advantage and allies while neutralizing its opponents. Thus it tries to create good will towards the state it represents. (Encyclopedia Britannia;.33.)

It should be noted, however, that, though in principles, a distinction may be made between foreign policy as substantive and legislative and diplomacy as procedural and executive; in practice, both diplomacy and foreign policy are contemporary. In some cases, they are even indistinguishable; as the process of implementing foreign policy entails a measure of policy decision-making and alteration of declared objectives. It is in this broad sense that the term diplomacy should be conceived if we are to make any meaning of the concept of "economic diplomacy”.

Diplomacy is often thought of as being concerned with peaceful activities, although it may occurs within war or armed conflict or be used in the orchestration of particular act of violence, such as seeking over flight clearance for an air strike. More generally there is also a widening content of diplomacy. At one level the changes in the substantive forms of diplomacy are reflected in terms, such as "oil diplomacy", "resource diplomacy", "knowledge diplomacy", "global goutce" and "transition diplomacy". Certainly what constitutes diplomacy today according to him goes beyond the sometimes matter narrow politico-strategic conception given to the term. Nor is it appropriate to view diplomacy in a restrictive or formal sense as being the preserve of foreign ministries and diplomatic service personnel. Rather diplomacy is undertaken by a wide range of actors including `political', diplomats, advisors, envoys and official forms of wide range of `domestic' ministries or agencies with their: foreign counterparts, reflecting its technical content; between. official from different international organizations such as the international monetary fund (IMF) and the united nations (UN) secretarial or involving foreign corporations and a host government transitionally; and with or through non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and `private' individuals.

According to Barston (2006), the function of diplomacy can be broken into six broad areas Ceremonial, Management, Information/Communication, International negotiations, duty of protection and normative/legal diplomacy, particular function within these categories are set out below. The significance of each will vary from state to state, as for some, diplomacy may be largely devoted to ceremonial representation; others may allocate resources to high level roving envoys or in support of an established role in international rule making. The functions of diplomacy are particularly closely related to evolving events and issues such as international crises, outbreak of violence, human and natural disaster which shift diplomatic sport light unto previously remote geographical area or issues.



Ceremonial:-This include protocol, representation and visits

Management:-This has to do with day to day problems, bilateral co-ordination, multilateral co-operation, strengthening bilateral relationships, Explanation and defense of policy, Promotion of interest (Political, economic, scientific, military, and terrorism).

Information and Communication:-This has to do with assignment, reporting and monitoring.

International Negotiations:-This has to do with duty of protection.

Contribution to International Order:-This has to do with normative/rule making/mediation/pacific settlement.

Traditional diplomacy is said to have been associated with the first of the Formal representation, protocol and participation in functions as stated above. the diplomatic circuit of a national capital or institutional continue as important element in state sovereignty and as part of the notion of international society. At a substantial level, much of the business of diplomacy is concerned with the management of short term routine issues in bilateral and unilateral relations (Co­ordination, consultation, lobbying, adjustment, the agenda of official or private visits). Which include the promotion and management. of interest which for most states are dominated by financial, economic resource issues and terrorism along with threat management.

The term "threat management" is used to differentiate these forms of diplomacy from defense security policy or traditional military security activities. According to R. P. Barston (2006), in discussing the development of diplomacy, an overview of the periods will help to give some perspective in which to consider the major changes that have taken place, and this is as a result of providing bench mark and highlights aspects that which have been noted as part of the development of diplomacy. According to him the argument is not about `old' or `new' but rather as Hocking B.(1999;21-24) and others; suggest, seeing diplomacy in an evolutionary sense. But rather David Davenport (2003) sees diplomacy as the subject of constant change, rather than major shifts constituting a new firm.

Adam Watson (1982), reviewing diplomacy and the nature of diplomatic dialogue noted the wide range of ministries involved in diplomacy; the corresponding decline in the influence of the foreign minister; the increase in the direct involvement of head of government in the details of foreign policy and diplomacy; and the growth in importance of the news media.

Hamilton and Langhorne (1995, 224), writing in the mid 1990s, in the Post-­Soviet and Yugoslav context, highlighted that `established diplomatic procedures have, as in earlier periods of political upheaval and transition, been exploited from distinctly undiplomatic ends'.








Bardhan, P. (200). The Nature of Institutional to Economic Development in Mancu Olson and Satu Kahkonen, (ed). A – Not-So-Dismal Science (Oxford: Oxford University Press)

Barston, R.P (2006) Modern Diplomacy, Third Edition, 1-5 Pearson, Longman

David Davenport, `The New Diplomacy', Policy Review, No. 116, Dec. 02,

Ernest, S. (1998), A Guide to Diplomatic Practice Longmans, Green & Co. London & New York, fifth edition (ISBN 0-582-50109-1FederaL Republic of Nigeria. Obasanjo' s Economic Direction (1999 -2000 April)

Harun, ur. R. (2005) Economic Diplomacy in Southern Asia: Address to the India Economy and Business Update, 18 August

Keith, H. and Richard, L. (1995) The Practice of Diplomacy. (routl edge, London,) p.224.

Kishan, R. (2002), Book on "Bilateral Diplomacy Published by Diplo Foundation Malta.

Madan K. D. et al. (2008) Nepali: A Generic Guideline for Development through Economic Diplomacy: Kathmandu Nepal, Institute of Foreign Affairs (IFA)

Masha, I. (2000), “New Perspective on Inflation in Nigeria” in CBN Economic and Financial Review, Vol. 38, No. 2, June.

Watson, A. (1982), Diplomacy: the Dialogue Between States. Methuen:238.

Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia

Suraj, M. and Olusola A. (2001), The Nigerian Economy Under Obasanjo In Development Policy Management Network Bulletin Vol. VIII, N°









Order Complete Project