IN this second part, the article widens itslens from warning to analysis. It interrogates the global consequences of elevating political leaders into saviours and examines how power, economics, religion, and identity converge in modern geopolitics. Using the American experience as a case study, this section explores how personality cults, economic policies, and strategic posturing ripple across borders – shaping global alliances, destabilizing economies, and influencing how vulnerable nations, including Nigeria, are perceived and positioned in the emerging world order. At its core, this part challenges the seductive but dangerous belief that national redemption can be imported.
In the American context, commentators have described elements of Trump’s following as exhibiting cult-like loyalty, with supporters venerating himin ways that resemble religious devotion rather than civic allegiance. Statements like “I alone can fix it” and claims to be the voice of the people foster a dynamic where loyalty to the leader overshadows loyalty to democratic institutions.
One must never take the outward appearance of a leader or the allure of power forgranted, for in many cases, the carefully cultivated image is designed to mask deeper and more far-reaching agendas. Political posturing, no matter how appealing, often conceals motives that impact nations far beyond borders. In today’s interconnected world, the consequences of these maneuvers are swift, systemic, and sometimes devastating.
Take, for example, President Donald Trump’s global tariff regime. At first glance, tariffs may appear to be a tool for domestic economic advantage, but the ripple effects extend far beyond U.S. shores. Developing nations, suddenly facing higher costs and disrupted trade flows, were forced to rethink their financial arrangements.
Many sought alternative convertible currency systemsandtrade partnerships, aiming to reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar. What seems like a policy targeting trade deficits is, in reality, a trigger for global economic recalibration. Economists now note that such shifts have begun to affect American markets as well, signaling that the once-unassailable dominance of the U.S. economy is no longer guaranteed.
Beyond economics, there is a broader geopolitical implication. America, longaccustomed to unchallenged influence on the global stage, is increasingly wary of emerging powers asserting themselves. Europe, Asia, and even some African nations have been quietly strengthening alliances, modernizing infrastructure, and investing strategically to gain leverage in the 21st-century order. Washington’s anxiety over losing supremacy is not merely about prestige – it is about control over resources, technology, and global governance.
Africa, in particular, has become central to this new global calculus. The continent’s wealth of minerals – critical for electronics, defense systems, and renewable energy technologies – places it squarely in the crosshairs of global competition. Nations that fail to assert sovereignty over their resources risk being maneuvered into dependency or influence by external powers. The scramble for these resources is strategic as much as it is economic, showing that global politics is rarely driven by altruism; it is driven by access, leverage, and long-term advantage. Domestically, the intertwining of politics and identity adds yet another layer.
Trump’s public embrace of Christian communities, particularly in connection with allies like Israel’s Prime Minister, has more than symbolic significance. It signals to his domestic base that he champions a moral cause, while simultaneously influencing international narratives about the U.S. as a protector of persecuted religious groups. Political loyalty, in this context, becomes tied not only to ideology but to perception of personal protection and global intervention. The message is clear: support the leader, and the leader will protect your values even far beyond your borders.
This is the point at which Nigeria must pause and reflect. We cannot afford the dangerous illusion that solutions to our challenges – security, governance, economic malaise, social fracturing – will arrive attached to a foreign figure or foreign power. Historically, no nation has risen by outsourcing its salvation. Peace will not come simply because a distant leader is praised as indispensable. Indeed, commentators on global policy have warned that such reliance on a foreign savior can destabilize international order, breed resentment, and weaken the very foundations of peace these saviors claim to uphold.
As Kwame Nkrumah once declared regarding African independence: “The independence of Ghana is meaningless if other African countries continue to be colonized. It is only after the entire continent is independent that our independence shallbe meaningful. “His words remind usthattruefreedomandsecuritycome from unity, self-reliance, and confronting our own challenges – not waiting for foreign intervention.
Similarly, Nelson Mandela emphasized: “I detest racialism, because I regard it asa barbaric thing. Never, never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience the oppression of one by another and suffer the indignity of being the skunk of the world.” The lesson is clear: liberation and justice require our own commitment, not the goodwill of outsiders.
It is for this reason, out of duty, not nostalgia that I have chosen to republish that article. Not to say “I told you so,” but to remind us that nations can still change course if they are willing to confront uncomfortable truths. History is unforgiving to leaders who ignore warnings, but it is also generous to societies that choose reflection over denial. Therefore, I present once again, five years later, an article whose relevance has not faded, whose message has not softened, and whose urgency has only grown:
NIGERIA, MY COUNTRY, SO DIVIDED.
In the 1960s, I was a young man who had just graduated college in the United Kingdom. I remember how excited I was and very much in a hurry to return home to my beloved country, Nigeria. It was a nation that was united and emerging, a country that was getting ready to compete with the rest of the emerging nations and a country that was expected to lead the rest of Africa. The prospects for Nigeria were endless. I recall telling my friends and mates in the United Kingdom before I left to return to Nigeria that, if there was any continent that was likely to become another America, it would be the continent of Africa, led by Nigeria, because Nigeria had everything: human capital, fertile land for agriculture, oil and gas, gold, diamond and more. It was easy to get caught up in my excitement as they wished me well and made plans to come visit my country soon. What emerges from this examination is a sobering truth: global power is never exercised in innocence, and salvation offered by outsiders always comes with conditions.
The convergence of economic leverage, religious symbolism, and political loyalty reveals how easily nations can mistake strategic interest for moral concern. For Nigeria, this moment demands clarity rather than desperation. History, as this section reminds us, does not reward nations that surrender their agency to foreign narratives or charismatic figures. It rewards those that recognize warning signs early, reclaim responsibility for their own future, and understand that true sovereignty – political, economic, and moral cannot be outsourced. This reflection sets the stage for a deeper return to Nigeria’s own story, its missed opportunities, and the painful lessons contained in its past.