Tinubu’s Frequent Travels ‘Overdone’, Says Jideofor Adibe
Tinubu’s Frequent Travels ‘Overdone’, Says Jideofor Adibe. Nigeria’s political space has been stirred by renewed debate over Tinubu foreign trips, following a critical assessment by Professor Jideofor Adibe of Nasarawa State University. Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today, the political scientist questioned the growing frequency of President Bola Tinubu’s international travels, arguing that they risk weakening domestic governance rather than strengthening Nigeria’s global standing.
According to Adibe, the President’s visits to more than ten countries since assuming office, including France, China, Brazil, India, the United Kingdom, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, represent an excessive reliance on personal diplomacy at a time when institutional channels should be doing much of that work.
He maintained that modern diplomacy no longer requires constant physical movement by a sitting president, especially when technology, trade delegations, and diplomatic missions can deliver similar outcomes at far lower cost to the public purse.
The critique also challenged the administration’s justification that frequent travel is necessary to attract foreign direct investment. Adibe dismissed this argument, stressing that investors respond primarily to domestic stability, security, infrastructure, and policy consistency rather than presidential presence abroad.
He warned that while agreements are being signed overseas, Nigerians at home are contending with rising taxes, inflationary pressure, and worsening insecurity, creating a troubling imbalance between foreign visibility and domestic leadership. Opposition figures and political groups have echoed similar concerns, describing the timing and scale of some trips as insensitive amid economic hardship and calling for greater transparency.
READ ALSO: Legendary Actor Jide Kosoko Becomes Oloja of Lagos Elect
Concluding his analysis, Adibe urged a return to institutionalized diplomacy, emphasizing that Nigeria’s foreign policy strength should rest on effective ministries and embassies, not on constant presidential travel, while insisting that meaningful international influence must first be anchored in strong and visible leadership at home.