UK State Visit: Why the Brits honoured Tinubu, by Olu Fasan

First of all, congratulations are in order. Although I am unapologetically and unrepentantly a principled critic of President Bola Tinubu, whose self-serving politics and indifference to moral leadership I find objectionable, I must admit that his recent state visit to the United Kingdom was a great honour to him. It was also an honour to Nigeria in whose name it took place. 

Financial Times, the London-based world-renowned global newspaper, interviewed me for its supplement on the state visit, which, in a sense, made me part of the historic event. But beyond the razzmatazz of the state visit, the key questions are: why did Britain extend such an honour to Tinubu nearly 40 years after it last hosted a Nigerian leader? And what are the benefits to Nigeria? 

First, let’s correct a misconception. Although the invitation to pay a state visit to the UK came from the British monarch, King Charles III, the idea was that of the British government. Britain is a constitutional monarchy, where the king is a ceremonial head of state. The elected government calls the shots, albeit acting in the name of “His Majesty’s Government”. Understanding that the state visit was on the advice of the UK government helps in answering the “why” and “what” questions.

Since Nigeria gained independence from Britain in 1960, only four of its leaders have, to date, paid state visits to the UK. The first was General Yakubu Gowon in 1973, followed by Alhaji Shehu Shagari in 1981 and then General Ibrahim Babangida in 1989. President Tinubu became the fourth last month. But if Tinubu’s state visit was at the instance of the British government, why did the government advise the king to host him and his wife 37 years after the last state visit by a Nigerian leader?

Well, the simple answer is that it was considered in Britain’s national interest to invite President Tinubu at this time. Some decades ago, a British prime minister said that a state visit should “promote the interests of the UK.” Those usually are Britain’s economic, political and security interests. Essentially, before a foreign leader is invited to pay a state visit to the UK, the British government would have considered it necessary to woo that leader to ensure he and his government look more favourably towards the UK in ways that help advance its interests.

Take one example. In 2018, during his first term, President Donald Trump paid a state visit to the UK. Barely eight years later in 2025, in the first year of his non-consecutive second term, he undertook another state visit to Britain, becoming the first foreign leader to pay two state visits to the UK. Indeed, also unusually, the British prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, personally gave President Trump the invitation for the second state visit. Addressing Trump at the White House in February 2025, Starmer said: “It was my privilege and honour to bring a letter with me today from His Majesty the King, inviting the President and the First Lady to make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.” He added: “An unprecedented second State Visit – this has never happened before.” 

But why did Britain give President Trump two state visits? Well, given Trump’s bull-in-a-china-shop behaviour on trade, among other things, the British government wanted to entice him in the hope of having an influence relationship with him, and more specifically hoping he would treat Britain less harshly as he hit countries around the world, including American allies, with high tariffs.

Which brings us back to President Tinubu’s state visit. What was in it for Britain? First, it’s about geopolitics and its security component. No foreign power with an interest in West Africa can ignore Nigeria, a regional power. Some commentators have, rightly, pointed to the significance of the Sahel region. Nigeria may be acutely and chronically unable to tackle its own internal security, but it’s a critical factor when it comes to the Sahel. But while Britain’s European rivals had tried to extend their reach into the Sahel through close relationships with Nigeria, the UK had hitherto been laid back. 

For instance, Germany gave Tinubu a state visit in 2023, France in 2024 and Turkey earlier this year. What signal would Britain send if it failed to follow suit? President Tinubu and President Macron of France have such a chummy relationship that they seem like buddies. Of course, Starmer cannot schmooze Tinubu like Macron does. The French are naturally romantic and touchy-feely, the Brits are reticent and reserved; they appeal to you at the intellectual level, not the emotional level. Yet, whatever its temperament, Britain wants to be one of the geopolitical and geostrategic players in West Africa. Hence, in its own understated way, it reached out to Nigeria through the state visit.

Then, there is the geoeconomics. Several years ago, as a magazine publisher in the UK, I was a member of the British-Nigerian Chamber of Commerce. At virtually every gathering of the chamber, members lamented that despite the colonial links, the English language, and the Commonwealth effect, Britain had lost commercial influence in Nigeria to countries like Germany which had none of those advantages. Some blamed British “arrogance” and “patronising” attitude; others blamed enduring resentments over the colonial legacy. But everyone agreed then, and agrees now, that there should be more trade and investment flows between Nigeria and Britain. And the British government is keen to increase Britain’s commercial presence in Nigeria while safeguarding its existing commercial interests in the country. Inviting President Tinubu on a state visit must thus also be seen as British commercial diplomacy, leading to more British companies doing business in Nigeria. 

Well, finally, linked to the geoeconomics, one cannot ignore Tinubu’s economic reforms. Truth is, while President Tinubu’s economics reforms have deepened poverty and misery in Nigeria, they have enriched foreign investors and traders. For instance, scrapping the fixed exchange rate means that they can now take their foreign currencies out of Nigeria more freely than under the pegged exchange regime; the devaluation of the naira allows them to buy Nigerian assets cheaply; and the high interest rates enable them to make money from short-term government bills. That’s why international market players are hailing Tinubu’s reforms, and that’s partly why Britain gave him a state visit. 

Interestingly, reforms were the reason Britain denied Muhammadu Buhari a state visit twice, while extending it to his successors: Babangida and Tinubu. As a military dictator from December 31, 1983 to August 27, 1985, Buhari offended Britain with the kidnap of Umaru Dikko on British soil, but also because of his dirigiste economic policies. But Babangida, who succeeded Buhari, introduced the Structural Adjustment Programme, SAP, which the then British government welcomed. In her memoir, The Downing Street Years, the former British prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, praised Babangida for “not just pressing ahead with, but actually toughening, the economic reform programme on which Nigeria had embarked.” Isn’t that exactly what the IMF and Western governments are saying about Tinubu? The reward was a state visit for Babangida and Tinubu, while Buhari, who, as a military and a civilian leader, rejected IMF-endorsed economic reforms, got none! 

So, let’s be clear, the state visit was, understandably, to promote UK’s interests. The presidency trumpeted “Ten Major Takeaways” from the state visit, including Britain’s pledges on security and defence, Lagos ports modernisation and duty-free market access for Nigerian products. But the devil is in the details and the implementation. Yet, the benefits of the state visit should go beyond those retail pledges. In the wider scheme of things, the question is who benefits from the geopolitical, geoeconomic and reform drivers of the state visit? Unfortunately, Nigeria has no track record of exploiting and reaping benefits from its relations with major powers, be it on security or trade! 

*Dr Fasan is the author of ‘In The National Interest: The Road to Nigeria’s Political, Economic and Social Transformation’, available at RovingHeights bookstores.

The post UK State Visit: Why the Brits honoured Tinubu, by Olu Fasan appeared first on Vanguard News.