The Presidency has attempted to quell rising speculation that France is poised to dominate Nigeria’s mining and solid minerals sector. This concern follows the recent signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the two nations during President Bola Tinubu’s state visit to France.
This agreement, ostensibly aimed at developing joint projects to diversify critical minerals value chains, has sparked widespread unease, with critics questioning whether Nigeria’s sovereignty over its mineral wealth is being compromised.
What’s in the MoU?
According to the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communication, Sunday Dare, the agreement does not grant France control over Nigeria’s mining rights. Instead, it outlines collaboration in areas such as research, training, environmental remediation, and sustainable mining practices.
Dare emphasized that the partnership is intended to align Nigeria with global standards while opening opportunities for the rehabilitation of over 2,000 abandoned mining pits and decarbonizing energy projects critical to the mining value chain.
The MoU also includes joint extractive and processing projects, co-financed by public and private entities, to secure the supply of critical minerals such as copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt, and rare earth elements. These minerals are vital for clean energy technologies, an area of increasing global competition.
Why It Matters
Nigeria’s mining sector, long overshadowed by oil and gas, holds untapped potential that could significantly boost economic diversification. However, the country’s history of exploitative foreign partnerships raises red flags. Agreements like this must be scrutinized to ensure they prioritize Nigeria’s interests over foreign gains.
The lack of transparency surrounding the MoU’s specifics fuels distrust, especially given its timing amid Nigeria’s economic struggles and rising insecurity. Critics argue that without proper safeguards, such deals could further entrench neocolonial dependencies, limiting Nigeria’s control over its natural resources.
Furthermore, the claim of “international best practices” must be viewed critically. Who defines these standards, and how will they protect Nigerian workers, communities, and ecosystems affected by mining?
Bottom Line
While the Presidency assures Nigerians that the MoU with France poses no threat to national sovereignty, the vague details and historical precedents call for greater vigilance. For this partnership to benefit Nigeria, it must prioritize local empowerment, environmental rehabilitation, and fair value sharing. Anything less risks turning a golden opportunity into yet another instance of foreign exploitation under the guise of collaboration.
