The treatment given to the two Binance executives, Nadeem Anjarwalla and Tigran Gambaryan, by the Nigerian government resembled the approach taken by Mohammed bin Salman at the Ritz-Carlton. Their detention was somewhat careless, allowing them privileges and even an escape opportunity. Nigeria’s response to the Binance affair appeared half-hearted, with the detention and trial seeming more like a scapegoating attempt. The government’s demand for $10 billion from the company further complicated the situation.
Accusations against Binance included involvement in money laundering, terrorist financing, and market manipulation in Nigeria. The government claimed that over $21.6 billion-worth of trades were conducted through Binance by concealed Nigerian identities. While these are serious allegations that merit attention, the aggressive approach of arrest and demands for payment appeared unwise. Comparisons to the United States’ handling of Binance demonstrated that there are more diplomatic and legal options to address such issues effectively.
Nigeria’s limited leverage over transnational corporations like Binance should have prompted a more strategic and cooperative approach. Cooperation through legal and diplomatic channels, as well as policy adjustments, would likely have yielded better outcomes than the forceful tactics employed. The rush to resort to abduction and demands for payment demonstrated a lack of foresight on the part of Nigerian officials.
The inclination of Nigerian officials towards aggressive actions, rather than thoughtful and strategic solutions, is a recurring issue. Blaming external entities for economic challenges, such as the recent case with Binance, reflects a lack of comprehensive understanding. International dealings require nuanced approaches, not just displays of force that Nigeria seems to favor in such matters.
The incident involving Binance should serve as a lesson for Nigerian leaders, especially in dealing with global corporations in the digital age. Utilizing outdated tactics and a grandstanding attitude do not align with the complexities of international business dynamics. Learning from such missteps is crucial for Nigeria’s engagement with the evolving global landscape.
Regarding Tigran Gambaryan, it might be prudent to reconsider the approach taken. The titles assigned to individuals and their roles within a corporation do not always reflect the actual power dynamics. Realizing that companies prioritize capital over sentiments could inform a more rational way forward, rather than pursuing futile actions.