Sport can be more significant than what many conceive of it. A schoolteacher asked one of her pupils to explain what is meant by the word ‘sport’, and she was dazzled by the response; the pupil simply said, “Sport is an activity we engage in when we are not in the classroom.” In the same vein, a girl asked her hardworking father what sport meant, and he replied simply that sport is an activity we participate in just to stay fit and look photogenic. This is how myopic some people can be on the roles of sports and sporting activities. Sport is not only an activity done outside the classroom or a fitness hub, but also an activity that bridges cultural and social gaps between individuals, and also unites states within the international political system. As a member of the international community, Nigeria has successfully utilised sport in diverse ways that are worth demystifying. A near-perfect definition of sport would be a diffusion of David Rowe and Nobert Elias’s. Without having to quote their words, sport can be defined as a form of regulated physical competition that reflects broader processes of social development embedding cultural, economic, and political contexts, serving as a significant site of identity formation and social interaction. 

How is sport an instrument of diplomacy? Over the years, sport has been a vital avenue for social and political interaction. Since the classical age, when ancient wrestling competitions and other sports brought together representatives from different empires who were not only interested in entertainment but also in discussing issues relating to their relationships. In the 21st century, sporting competitions such as football, basketball, and cricket have fostered a spirit of teamwork and solidarity among fans and spectators. In 1980, sport wielded some linkages with the international political system as it was being used to achieve both positive and negative interests of political leaders. It can serve as a positive force when used by states to foster friendly relations with others, but also as a negative influence when exploited to promote hostility. Participation in sporting activities has been influenced by diplomatic programmes of individual states.

This was how the term ‘sport diplomacy’ came about—the extent to which a state utilizes sport for its national interest. Segun Odegbami described sport diplomacy as a win-win situation. As an instrument of diplomacy, sport is valuable as a tool for influence and for making friends. Sport can be perceived as another traditional tool of statecraft that allows nations to make bold statements about their positions on various issues, and it can be characterised as a form of ‘soft power’. Through participation or non-participation in international sporting events, countries can effectively propagate their reactions to global issues. Sporting participation promotes dialogue and cultural understanding, encourages global excellence, and fosters healthy competition among nations. For example, in 1971, the United States sought improved relations with the People’s Republic of China, sending a table-tennis team for a friendly exchange, which became known as “Ping-Pong diplomacy”. Conversely, non-participation can sow discord, as seen in the 1984 Olympic boycott by the Soviet Union and its allies, in retaliation for the US-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games. Put it differently, engaging or disengaging in sporting events depicts the positive or negative relations between states. Here, Nigeria’s participation in the 1961 Arab Cup of Nations with Iraq and Kuwait, and its withdrawal from the 1996 African Cup of Nations, owing to political disputes serve good examples.  

Since independence, Nigeria has succeeded in international sports competitions, effectively using sports to strengthen its foreign policy and project a positive image worldwide. Nigeria’s foreign policy since 1960 has focused on democracy, peaceful unification of Africa, non-aggressive conflict resolution, independence from global powers, and economic collaboration. Its participation in the 1964 Tokyo Olympics boosted its international profile, with athletes like Nojim Maiyegun winning bronze medals, drawing global attention to Nigeria’s sporting talent. Despite the civil war of 1967-1970, Nigeria competed in the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. In 1976, Nigeria led an African boycott of the Montreal Olympics to protest apartheid South Africa, demonstrating sport’s diplomatic role. Nigeria’s opposition to perceived neo-colonial influences was reaffirmed by its participation in the 1980 Moscow Olympics and the 1984 Los Angeles Games, which symbolised its non-aligned stance.

At the 1984 Olympics, Nigeria secured medals in boxing and track events. Under General Ibrahim Babangida’s leadership (1985-1993), sport remained a diplomatic tool, supporting anti-apartheid efforts, including boycotting the 1986 Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh. Nigeria’s role in South African politics—calling for the end of apartheid, releasing political prisoners, and supporting Nelson Mandela—illustrates sport’s diplomatic power. During Mandela’s era, Nigeria also participated successfully in the 1988 Seoul and 1992 Barcelona Olympics, winning medals. The 1996 African Cup of Nations boycott, ordered by General Sani Abacha due to political tensions with Nelson Mandela, damaged Nigeria’s international reputation and severed diplomatic ties with South Africa, showcasing sport’s capacity to influence politics adversely.

In sum, sport has been an essential means by which Nigeria affirms its credibility on the international stage. It serves as a powerful tool for strengthening Nigeria’s position as a champion for Africans, particularly in combating racism. Nigerian athletes, such as Anthony Joshua, Peter Odemwingie, and Leon Balogun, utilise their abilities to fight against this modern-day African issue. 

Theophilus Agofure Tabuke, Lagos State University 

The post  Nigeria and Sport as a Diplomatic Tool  appeared first on THISDAYLIVE.