Nigerians Express Mixed Reactions to President Tinubu’s Extensive Foreign Trips in January 2026

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s frequent international travels have sparked widespread debate among Nigerians, with many questioning the timing and benefits amid escalating economic hardships, insecurity, and inflation in the country. As earlier reported by NaijaChoice News, the President embarked on a series of foreign visits starting from late December 2025, spending a significant portion of January 2026 abroad.

According to reports, President Tinubu left Nigeria on December 28, 2025, for Europe, marking the beginning of what became 23 days spent on foreign soil in January alone. He first spent about nine to ten days in France for an end-of-year break and holiday, described by some as a much-needed rest but criticized by others as ill-timed. From there, he proceeded to Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for the Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week 2026, where he stayed for six to seven days, engaging in discussions on renewable energy and sustainable development. The President’s itinerary culminated in a six-day state visit to Turkey, where he returned to Nigeria on January 31, 2026.

These trips, part of over 47 foreign engagements since assuming office in May 2023, have drawn sharp criticism from opposition figures and ordinary citizens alike. Former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi was among the vocal critics, highlighting that the President spent only eight days in Nigeria during January while the nation grappled with worsening security and economic woes. Obi emphasized that the first month of the year sets the tone for challenges ahead, urging greater focus on domestic issues.

A cross-section of Nigerians shared their views with NaijaChoice News, reflecting a mix of frustration and cautious optimism. Divine Akor described the 23-day absence as “outrageous,” especially against the backdrop of crushing inflation, hunger, and insecurity. “At a time like this, such statistics raise serious questions about the fate of Nigerians,” Akor said. He dismissed defenses of the trips as “economic diplomacy” or “investor talks,” calling them “mere gimmicks” without verifiable results. “Where are the investments? Where are the jobs? Foreign companies are folding up, not coming in like under President Goodluck Jonathan,” he queried.

Michael Ameh echoed similar sentiments, pointing out the irony in the President’s calls for national sacrifice while seemingly prioritizing personal comfort abroad. “Leadership in crisis demands presence, urgency, and empathy—not prolonged absence,” Ameh lamented. He charged Tinubu to demonstrate tangible impacts from these trips, such as job creation, improved infrastructure, and reduced inflation, warning that without results, they appear as “personal vacations or medical care.“

Paul Igbashangev added that the trips make it seem like the President is “jet-setting more than governing.” “We’ve got pressing issues at home—insecurity, economic hardship, infrastructure decay—and he’s off to France, UAE, Turkey? Show me the results! Billions spent on foreign trips in two years? That’s a lot of money that could make life better for Nigerians,” he said.

On social media platform X, users expressed similar concerns. One post criticized the trips as wasteful, mocking officials for “shining teeth” during send-offs and welcomes, while another questioned the lack of foreign investment or security improvements despite the travels. Advocacy groups like the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) even called for a halt to further trips in 2026, citing ongoing massacres and insecurity, such as in Kwara State.

However, not all reactions were negative. Some Nigerians defended the President’s diplomatic efforts, arguing they are essential for Nigeria’s global positioning. Augustine Oyiwona acknowledged public skepticism due to the high costs amid domestic challenges like fuel price hikes, unemployment, and inflation. Yet, he noted that such visits could attract foreign investors, enhance Nigeria’s influence as the “giant of Africa,” and foster partnerships in debt talks, trade, energy, and security. “We’ve seen recent improvements in security cooperation with the United States,” Oyiwona added.

Abdulkadir Hassan reinforced this view, stating that building international relationships is a core presidential duty. He highlighted the UAE summit as a platform for securing investments in renewable energy and the Turkey visit, which resulted in nine signed agreements covering diaspora policy, defence cooperation, economy and trade joint committee, halal quality infrastructure, higher education, media and communication, and diplomacy academy. “These weren’t done in isolation but to develop Nigeria and Nigerians at large,” Hassan said.

An advocacy group, in a recent statement, described Tinubu’s trips as “strategic and productive,” emphasizing their role in diplomatic offensives and potential long-term gains. Supporters on X also pointed to these outcomes, urging patience for visible benefits.

As Nigeria continues to face multifaceted challenges, the debate over President Tinubu’s foreign engagements underscores the need for transparency and demonstrable results.