By Theophilus Ejorh
Ngozi Okonjo Iweala needs no introduction to many people in the world. She is a woman of substance in every sense and radiates optimism, influence, power and meaning. The Nigerian-born economist and international development specialist maintains an intellectual and professional record that is staggering. She attended two first-class universities – Harvard University, where she graduated magna cum laude (With Great Honour) in Economics, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for her PhD in Regional Economics and Development. She was also a two-time finance minister in Nigeria in two different administrations and the country’s former minister of foreign affairs. She worked at the World Bank as a development economist and rose to the position of managing director, sits on the board of several top-notch establishments, belongs to over two dozen professional bodies, won over two dozen international awards, and has several honorary degrees under her belt, some from first-class universities in the world. Recognising her competencies, the South African government recently appointed her a member of the country’s Presidential Economic Advisory Council. Dr Okonjo-Iweala is a legend and maintains a calm and cheery deportment. However, behind that veneer of calmness is a spirit forged in steel, a courageous and determined disposition.
This week, she was elected the director-general of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the Geneva-based intergovernmental body founded in 1995 to promote global prosperity and peace, plucking 104 votes from 164 member states to defeat her South Korean rival, Yoo Myung-hee. Ms Myung-hee maintains an impressive record herself. She is South Korea’s current and first female trade minister and has worked in various government agencies for the past 25 years.
In recent times, WTO’s ability to fulfil its mandate has been marred by complex power struggle and insidious politics between America and China. This was the chief reason for America’s blocking of Ms Okonjo-Iweala’s election. It has nothing to do with her racial identity, as some people claim. There is also the comparative advantage factor in the saga. America has better and stronger political and economic ties with South Korea than it does with Nigeria.
The selection process had been stringent and could be likened to the Vatican electing the Pope. The contest had kicked off with eight candidates, five men (representing Mexico, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Moldova and the United Kingdom) and three women (representing Nigeria, South Korea and Kenya). Since its inception twenty-five years ago, the WTO has not had a woman as its head. So, it was uplifting when Okonjo-Iweala and Myung-hee emerged as the last two contenders after a long and sapping process of chopping and trimming. It was a victory for women and the world, a subversion of an outrageous tradition. The two women had put up a very impressive showing.
It should be noted that the director-general must not work to favour any particular country or promote an individualistic agenda. Ms Myung-hee affirmed this in an interview. The appointee is required to work for the common interest of member-states.
So, why should an individual like Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala who holds Nigerian and American citizenship be blocked by America, her adopted country? At first, America’s action sounds absurd. But it makes political sense when one considers closely and dispassionately the intrigues involved.
The voting reflected regional leanings in some ways. Okonjo-Iweala polled votes from the European Union and the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) states. Myung-hee got votes from South East Asian countries, Japan and America. The result was a stalemate. It remained China to vote. Its vote would determine the winner. Without dithering about it, it voted for Ms Okonjo-Iweala, which gave her the victory. Ideally, America should have honoured the Chinese vote as a mediator in the deadlock. But Trump would have none of it. To him, China is America’s enemy, an enemy only he and his cohorts have imagined and given expression to. Agreeing would have amounted to kowtowing before your enemy, especially a potent foe you think has been responsible for your current woes.
China’s vote for Okonjo-Iweala should not be a surprise for several reasons. The first was to spite America and rub the nose of its President, Donald Trump, in the dirt. It was payback time for the irreverent American president, who has been beating drums of war with the Chinese in recent times, characteristically spewing insults on the Asian giant for instigating the Coronavirus epidemic that has devastated America’s economy, and decimated many of its population, a good reason Mr Trump would likely lose the presidential election to his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, in November. Trump burns with wrath against China, and it was not a surprise that his government should oppose the election of Okonjo-Iweala, one of its citizens, to the WTO’s coveted position.
In August this year, President Trump had condemned China’s admission into the WTO, describing it as “one of the greatest economic disasters of all time.” He had also accused the organisation of gravitating towards Beijing’s interest by condoning its breaches of trade rules, which had prompted the current trade war between the two countries. Also, this year, the American president issued an executive order banning transactions with the Chinese social networking service, Tiktok, citing security threats, an action the company believed to be politically motivated. Over 80 million Americans use the service. The problem has intensified bitterness between China and America, and experts believe it could have a lasting effect on trade between them as well as compel tech-based businesses to choose to operate in either of the two countries.
Furthermore, South Korea and Nigeria are trade partners with America. So, ideally, America should have no issues with either Myung-hee or Okonjo-Iweala heading the WTO. But one important question needs to be asked: between South Korea and Nigeria, which is America’s bigger or more important partner? The following scenario is useful. The United States first established diplomatic relations with Korea in 1882 (over one and half centuries before its partition) under a treaty they signed that year. After the partition of Korea in 1945, the United States and South Korea signed a Mutual Defence Treaty for a comprehensive military alliance following military threats posed by North Korea. That treaty still stands till date, with America maintaining a heavy military presence in South Korea to protect the Korean Peninsula. In terms of trade, South Korea is America’s 8th largest trade partner with the volume of trade between them worth US$73.6b, while China is South Korea’s highest trade partner, with US$136.2b worth of the volume of trade. If trade relations should be a critical factor, then China should have voted for the South Korean candidate as America did.
In contrast, Nigeria is America’s 49th largest trading partner, with goods flow between them worth US$8.3b, a far cry from the volume of trade between America and South Korea. If at all trade and security consideration were partly why America had supported Myung-hee, it was only in the political sense, rather than an act of racism.
The statement by the office of US Trade Representative claiming that Ms Okonjo-Iweala lacks expertise in trade, which was the reason America has opposed her election thus sounds narrow-minded and inane. How can someone with a bachelor’s degree in Economics from Harvard, a PhD in Regional Economics and Development from MIT, two world-class universities, and worked at the World Bank as a development economist not have expertise in trade? It is like studying medicine without having knowledge of immunology, or Psychology without knowledge of social cognition. It does not make intellectual sense.
It is expected that America’s position would change if Joe Biden defeats Donald Trump in the US presidential elections. And when that happens, it will give credence to the thinking that Trump’s rejection of Okonjo-Iweala was only an action verging on pettiness and habitual infantile umbrage, this time towards China. It is all complex politics, a power play that has nothing to do with race. There is a war between two superpowers and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala happens to be the unlucky victim in the crossfire.
