Nigeria went to the United States last week with a straightforward message: our country has enormous mineral resources, and we want investors to come and develop them.

During the visit, the Minister of Solid Minerals Development, Dr Dele Alake, told American investors that Nigeria’s mineral wealth is estimated at more than $700 billion and invited them to invest in exploration, processing and industries around these resources.

Then the noise started.

Some people began shouting that President Bola Tinubu was selling Nigeria to America.

No. That is not what happened.

People need to understand the difference between selling a country’s resources and marketing a country’s opportunities or inviting investors to develop them.

Nigeria has enormous mineral deposits, but having resources in the ground does not make a country rich. The value comes from exploration, processing, manufacturing, exports, jobs, taxes and the businesses that grow around them.

If American companies come to Nigeria, invest their money, bring technology, establish processing plants, employ Nigerians and produce goods for local and international markets, why should that automatically be described as selling Nigeria?

The important issue is whether Nigeria negotiates properly and gets a fair return.

We should insist on local value addition, Nigerian employment, technology transfer, environmental protection and proper taxation. We should also ensure that we do not simply export raw minerals while importing the finished products at much higher prices.

There is another important benefit that is often overlooked: developing Nigeria’s mineral resources can also help tackle insecurity in mining communities.

The discovery of commercially valuable minerals in many rural communities has brought a new dimension to Nigeria’s security crisis. In some areas, illegal mining has become intertwined with banditry and armed groups. There have also been allegations of unscrupulous local and foreign operators using criminal networks to secure illegal mining sites and protect their activities.

The consequences have been devastating: communities have been destabilised, people killed and kidnapped, and large areas of the country placed under the influence of non-state actors.

Leaving valuable mineral sites outside a properly regulated system creates room for criminals to take control.

But when legitimate investors come in under government supervision, mining sites can be properly licensed, mapped, secured and monitored. Legal operators have an interest in protecting their investments, while government has a clearer presence and responsibility in those areas. Formal mining can therefore help push criminal networks and illegal operators out of places where they have been allowed to thrive.

Investment alone will not solve banditry. Security agencies must still do their job, and the government must enforce the law. But bringing the mining sector into the formal economy removes some of the space in which illegal miners and armed groups currently operate.

That is the conversation we should be having.

For years, we have complained about Nigeria’s dependence on crude oil. We have complained about unemployment, weak manufacturing, poor exports and the inability to attract enough productive capital.

Now there is an attempt to open up mining and other sectors to serious investment, and some people are behaving as if investment itself is a crime.

How exactly do we diversify the economy without investment?

How do we build factories without capital?

How do we develop mining without technology and expertise?

How do we export more Nigerian products without efficient ports and transportation?

This is also why the Federal Government’s push to modernise the country’s ports matters. The approval to upgrade Onne, Delta, Rivers and Calabar ports, alongside the earlier work around Apapa and Tin Can Island, is part of the infrastructure Nigeria needs if it wants to become a serious manufacturing and trading economy.

Minerals need roads and ports. Factories need power and logistics. Exporters need efficient transportation. Investors need an environment where businesses can operate and expand.

This is what economic diversification actually requires.

Tinubu’s economic agenda is not simply about finding another source of government revenue. It is about changing the structure of the economy and reducing the country’s dependence on crude oil.

Mining, manufacturing, agriculture, maritime business, logistics and other productive sectors have to become bigger parts of the Nigerian economy.

Of course, the government must be questioned.

Contracts should be transparent. Investors must obey Nigerian laws. Communities must benefit. The environment must be protected. Nigerians must get jobs and opportunities from the resources that belong to Nigeria.

But there is a difference between asking these legitimate questions and claiming that every foreign investor is coming to take Nigeria away.

If America wants to invest in Nigerian minerals, let them come.

If China wants to invest in infrastructure, let them come.

If Europe, India or any other country wants to invest in Nigeria, let them come.

Our job is to negotiate properly, protect our interests and make sure Nigerians get the benefits.

We cannot complain that Nigeria is poor and, at the same time, reject the investment required to build industries.

We cannot sit on billions of dollars worth of minerals and keep asking why Nigeria is not industrialised.

Those who prefer isale are free to remain there and become monuments to yesterday.

Nigeria has to move.

And if the Tinubu administration can successfully turn the country’s mineral wealth, ports and other productive assets into factories, jobs, exports and broader economic opportunities, that will matter far more to Nigerians than the latest round of political noise.

Nigeria is not being sold.

Nigeria is being opened for business.