By By Dada Olusegun
Politics has always been less about facts than about focus. What a society chooses to amplify often says more about it than the events themselves. That reality was once again on display during President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s recent working visit to Ankara, Turkey.
Rather than interrogate the substance of the trip; its economic intent, diplomatic weight, and strategic outcome, public attention at home gravitated toward a fleeting moment during a ceremonial guard inspection. A brief misstep, lasting seconds, became a stand-in for what should have been a serious national conversation about trade, security, and international partnership.
This fixation missed the point entirely.
President Tinubu did not travel to Turkey for symbolism or spectacle. The visit was anchored on hard negotiations, culminating in a shared ambition to grow bilateral trade to $5 billion and the signing of nine Memoranda of Understanding covering defense, education, diplomacy, media, and economic cooperation. These are not ceremonial documents; they are frameworks with long-term implications.
Interestingly, the reaction abroad stood in sharp contrast to the frenzy at home. Turkish officials and media outlets treated the visit for what it was: a working engagement between two sovereign nations. The highlight for them was not a viral clip but the formal activation of the Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO), a mechanism intended to institutionalize trade and investment flows between Nigeria and Turkey.
That contrast matters. It underscores how easily public discourse can be derailed when optics are allowed to overshadow outcomes.
Turkey’s relevance to Nigeria is not incidental. It is a major player in defense manufacturing, infrastructure delivery, and industrial development – sectors Nigeria is actively trying to strengthen. The agreements signed in Ankara reflect a convergence of interests, particularly under the administration’s Renewed Hope Agenda, which prioritizes economic diversification, security reform, and foreign direct investment.
Among the agreements reached were commitments on military cooperation, export facilitation through Halal quality infrastructure, academic and diplomatic training exchanges, diaspora engagement, media collaboration, and social services.
Collectively, they point to a relationship that goes beyond rhetoric and into structured cooperation.
Since returning to Abuja, the administration has resumed its domestic reform drive, particularly in the energy sector and investment policy space. Implementation, as always, will be the true test. But it is difficult to argue that the trip itself lacked purpose or direction.
In the end, the episode raises a broader question about political engagement in Nigeria: are we more interested in moments or in momentum? For critics, the stumble became the story. For governance, it was incidental. History rarely remembers who walked perfectly; it remembers who moved a country forward.
