In a baffling and deeply offensive display of hubris, and misplaced patriotism, Vice President, Kashim Shettima, launched a condescending attack on Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the UK Conservative Party, for her candid criticism of Nigeria’s long-standing issues of corruption and insecurity. Badenoch, born to Nigerian parents and partly raised in Lagos, has spoken openly about her experiences growing up in a nation plagued by mismanagement, military dictatorship, and socioeconomic collapse. Yet, instead of engaging with her critiques, Shettima resorted to personal attacks, questioning her pride in her Nigerian heritage and suggesting she “remove Kemi from her name” if she dared to criticize Nigeria. By making such an outrageous suggestion, Shettima stooped to a level of petty defensiveness unworthy of his office. Shettima’s remarks are emblematic of a political elite that views legitimate critique as betrayal and sycophancy as loyalty. Let it be clear: Badenoch’s criticisms are not an insult to Nigeria – they are a condemnation of its ruling class, of which Shettima is an emblematic example.
Badenoch was born Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke in Wimbledon, south London, after her Nigerian parents travelled to the UK to receive private healthcare. Her family then returned to Nigeria, before Badenoch returned in 1996 aged 16 to study A-Levels while working part time in a McDonald’s restaurant. She married her husband, an investment manager, Hamish Badenoch, in 2012. Speaking during a trip to the US last week, Badenoch said: “I’m a child of the 80s. I was born in London, but I grew up in Lagos, Nigeria – a place where almost everything seemed broken.” She added: “I watched my family become poor as their wealth, income and savings were inflated away by destructive government policies. They didn’t call it socialism – but it definitely was. Capital controls, no freedom of movement, government owning the means of production. There was no freedom either, the government deciding which school your child would go to, deciding what businesses could or could not operate all the way to arrests with no trial, state-sanctioned murder.”
In a reaction of anger, Vice President, Shettima told Badenoch, who is of Yoruba descent to remove Kemi from her name if she was not proud to be a Nigerian, instead of denigrating her heritage and her country of ancestry. “She is entitled to her own opinions; she has even every right to remove the Kemi from her name but that does not underscore the fact that the greatest black nation on earth is the nation called Nigeria.” Shettima compared Badenoch to Rishi Sunak, her predecessor, adding: “Rishi Sunak, the former British prime minister, is originally from India. A very brilliant young man, he never denigrated his nation of ancestry nor poured venom on India.” Sunak was born in Southampton to east African-born parents of Indian Punjabi descent.
This kind of rhetoric is unbecoming of a high-ranking official. Rather than confronting Nigeria’s undeniable problems, Shettima’s reaction epitomizes the defensive posture of a political class allergic to accountability. Badenoch’s reflections on her Nigerian childhood are rooted in lived experience, not abstract generalizations. By recounting the fear and instability she witnessed, Badenoch does not denigrate her heritage – she dignifies it by seeking to confront uncomfortable truths. For Shettima to respond with venom instead of reflection is not just misguided – it is a slap in the face to all Nigerians who demand better from their leaders.
Shettima’s ill-judged comparison to Rishi Sunak only underscores his flawed logic and is laughable. Sunak has never hesitated to speak frankly about issues affecting the UK or even his ancestral India when necessary. He has not shied away from commenting on systemic issues in Britain, including its colonial past. True patriotism lies in accountability and the courage to confront failures, not in blind allegiance to a failing status quo. Indeed, patriotism does not mean blind loyalty; it means having the courage to demand better from one’s nation. For Shettima to demand unquestioning loyalty, even in the face of pervasive corruption and insecurity, is to embrace the very mediocrity that has held Nigeria back for decades. Badenoch’s spokesman rightly pointed out that she is “not the PRO for Nigeria.” Her role is to lead the UK Conservative Party, not to gloss over the Nigerian government’s failures. And while Badenoch’s remarks may sting, they echo the sentiments of millions of Nigerians, both at home and abroad, who are fed up with leaders who dismiss legitimate concerns as unpatriotic attacks.
Shettima’s remarks also expose a staggering lack of self-awareness. Nigeria, under the stewardship of leaders like him, has become synonymous with insecurity, corruption, and missed opportunities. From rampant kidnappings and terrorism to an economy that continues to falter, the nation’s woes are not the fabrications of an “ungrateful” diaspora but the lived reality of millions of Nigerians. Rather than acknowledge and address these issues, Shettima’s response is a shameful attempt to shift the blame onto a woman who dared to speak the truth. Instead of attempting to silence critics like Badenoch, Shettima and his APC co-travelers should focus on addressing Nigeria’s issues head-on. How many Nigerians, for instance, can speak truthfully about their personal safety in a nation where kidnappings, armed banditry, and police brutality remain rampant? How many can afford basic healthcare in a country where leaders routinely seek medical attention abroad? Badenoch’s observations are a mirror reflecting a painful reality that Nigerian leaders must confront, not deflect.
Furthermore, Shettima’s insinuation that Badenoch should suppress her identity if she chooses to critique Nigeria is deeply troubling, and reeks of chauvinism and cultural gatekeeping. Names are deeply personal and are not subject to the whims of politicians desperate to deflect criticism. Names are not tools of loyalty tests; they are personal identifiers steeped in culture, history, and pride. Badenoch’s name and identity are hers alone to define, just as her experiences are hers to articulate. Suggesting otherwise reeks of arrogance and paternalism. The irony is palpable: a government that cannot provide its citizens with basic security or services demands “pride” from those who have survived its dysfunction. Shettima’s remarks reflect not just his own insecurity but the broader failure of Nigeria’s political elite to accept responsibility for the nation’s parlous state. Leaders who truly care for Nigeria’s reputation would focus on fixing its systemic problems, not silencing critics.
Shettima’s disgraceful outburst is not just an embarrassment to his office but a disservice to Nigerians everywhere. Badenoch’s criticisms are a call to action – a reminder that Nigerians deserve leaders who respond to failures with solutions, not self-righteous indignation. Nigeria will earn its place as the “giant of Africa,” not by denying its problems but by acknowledging and addressing them. To silence dissent is to betray the values of progress and democracy that millions of Nigerians strive for daily. If Shettima is genuinely concerned about Nigeria’s image and reputation, he should dedicate his energy to resolving the corruption and insecurity that tarnish it – not lashing out at those who dare to speak truth to power. Until those in power stop seeing critique as treachery and start treating it as an opportunity for growth, Nigeria’s future will remain mired in the failures of its past.
