Presidency Backtracks on Maersk Investment Claim Amid Growing Skepticism

In a turn of events that has left many shaking their heads, the Nigerian government, via Bayo Onanuga, special adviser on information and strategy to President Bola Tinubu, clarified that there was no agreement or deal signed between the government and the Danish shipping giant, Maersk. The statement comes after President Tinubu’s office had earlier claimed a $600 million investment deal had been secured during discussions with Maersk CEO, Robert Maersk Uggla.

Onanuga’s comments on Tuesday revealed that there had only been talk “of possible investment in Nigeria” and that no formal agreements had been reached. This admission followed the presidency’s earlier announcement that Maersk had pledged to inject $600 million into the Nigerian seaport industry, which quickly turned out to be an overstatement.

The original statement issued by the presidency proudly boasted that “Danish shipping company, A.P Moller-Maersk plans $600m investment in Nigeria,” a claim that Maersk officials have since debunked. To add to the embarrassment, Onanuga’s social media post trumpeting the investment news was hastily deleted, further fueling skepticism.

When pressed for clarification, Onanuga admitted that “no document or agreement was signed, so there was no deal,” emphasizing that there had merely been discussions about a possible investment. He attempted to downplay the fallout, suggesting that people were “unnecessarily giddy over nothing.”

The incident has become yet another example of the Nigerian government seemingly counting its chickens before they’ve hatched, with Maersk’s spokesperson reiterating that the company was “not able to comment on any investment talks.” Despite the presidency’s efforts to put a positive spin on things, the lack of a concrete deal has left many Nigerians wondering if the government is simply spinning tales to create a sense of progress.

This episode might serve as a cautionary tale for the presidency about the risks of overselling and underdelivering—especially when the proof isn’t in the pudding, but rather, in the absence of any pudding at all.